RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2020-02731

xxxxxxxxxxx	COUNSEL: NONE

 	HEARING REQUESTED: NO	 

APPLICANT’S REQUEST

His Reentry (RE) code of “2Q” which denotes “Personnel Medically Retired or Discharge” be changed to “1M” which denotes “Eligible to Reenlist” to allow reentry into the service.

APPLICANT’S CONTENTIONS

He is currently applying for enlistment in the XXXXXX Air National Guard (XXANG) and requires a change to his RE code to be able to enlist.  His civilian expertise is of interest to the XXANG and his medical condition of Reactive Airway Disease does not interfere with his current career duties.  There have been no signs of disease or exacerbation as he performs his current duties.  He was told he would need continued treatment for the condition of Reactive Airway Disease and Allergic Rhinitis.  To date, he has not been hospitalized or treated for this disease and continues to meet operational standards.  He has served as a law enforcement officer, firefighter, emergency medical technician (EMT), and a mountaineering instructor.   

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant is a former Air Force senior airman (E-4).

On 29 Nov 95, AF Form 618, Medical Board Report, indicates the applicant was referred to the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) for Reactive Airway Disease/Asthma and Allergic Rhinitis.

Dated 14 Dec 95, AF Form 356, Informal Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF Physical Evaluation Board, indicates the applicant was found unfit due to his medical condition of Reactive Airway Disease with a disability compensation rating of 10 percent with a recommendation of “Discharge with Severance Pay.”

On 22 Dec 95, AF Form 1180, Action on Physical Evaluation Board Findings and Recommended Disposition, indicates the applicant disagreed with the findings of the IPEB hearing and requested a formal hearing.  
Dated 22 Jan 96, AF Form 356, Formal Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF Physical Evaluation Board, indicates the applicant was found unfit due to his medical condition of Reactive Airway Disease with a disability compensation rating of 10 percent with a recommendation of “Discharge with Severance Pay.”  The Board concurred with the IPEB recommendation noting the testimony and medical evidence confirm the member is unable to perform the duties of his grade and office and is unable to complete his unit’s deployment tasking’s, requiring extensive, daily medication to function.  Pulmonary Functions Tests document a significant decrease in capability when exercised.

On 22 Jan 96, AF Form 1180, Action on Physical Evaluation Board Findings and Recommended Disposition, indicates the applicant disagreed with the findings of the Formal PEB hearing and desires to submit a rebuttal.  

Dated 7 Feb 96, Memorandum from Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council indicates the applicant be separated from active service for physical disability under provisions of 10 USC 1203, with severance pay.

On 25 Mar 96, DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, reflects the applicant was honorably discharged in the grade of senior airman (E-4) after serving 3 years, 3 months, and 26 days of active duty.  He was discharged, with a narrative reason for separation of “Disability, Severance Pay.”

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisories at Exhibits C and D.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION

AFPC/DP2SSM recommends denying the application finding no error or injustice to the applicant’s request to change his RE code.  The applicant received a disability discharge on 25 Mar 96 after serving 3 years, 3 months, and 26 days of service with a narrative reason for separation of “Disability, Severance Pay” and an honorable character of service.  Per AFI 36-2606, Reenlistments in the USAF, Table 3.2, Item 16, the applicant received a RE code of “2Q” based on his disability discharge.  Per AFPC/DPPDS memorandum dated 7 Feb 96, the Air Force directed the applicant be separated for physical disability with severance pay.  The applicant is specifically asking for a “1M” RE code; however, this RE code states “Do not separate Airmen with this RE code” per AFI 36-2606, Table 3.1, Item 4.  Additionally, per AFI 36-2606, Table 3.1, item 2, the only 1# series RE code an Airman can separate with is “1J” which denotes “Eligible to reenlist, but elects separation. (All Airmen selected under the Selective Reenlistment Program and elect separation are given RE code 1J).”  The RE code “1J” would not be appropriate as the applicant was not selected or qualified for reenlistment, but was medically discharged.

The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPFDD recommends denying the application finding no error or injustice occurred at the time the PEB processed his disability case or an error in the DD Form 214.  On 22 Jan 96, the Formal PEB found the applicant unfit for continued military service for Reactive Airway Disease with a 10 percent disability rating and recommended Discharge with Severance Pay (DWSP).  On 7 Feb 96 the Secretary of the Air Force directed DWSP effective 25 Mar 96 under Separation Program Designator Code “JFL.”  The DD Form 214 was prepared on 25 Mar 96 correctly captured this decision and the RE code of “2Q” was properly applied per AFI 36-2606, Table 5.4, Conditions Barring Immediate Reenlistment.

The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION

The Board sent a copy of the advisory opinion to the applicant on 2 Sep 21 for comment (Exhibit E), but has received no response.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

1.  The application was not timely filed.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.  After reviewing all Exhibits, the Board concludes the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of AFPC/DP2SSM and AFPC/DPFDD and finds a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  The Board also notes the applicant did not file the application within three years of discovering the alleged error or injustice, as required by Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code, and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR).  The Board does not find it in the interest of justice to waive the three-year filing requirement.  Therefore, the Board finds the application untimely and recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

RECOMMENDATION

The Board recommends informing the applicant the application was not timely filed; it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay; and the Board will reconsider the application only upon receipt of relevant evidence not already presented.

CERTIFICATION

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2020-02731 in Executive Session on 23 Nov 21:

, Panel Chair
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

All members voted against correcting the record.  The panel considered the following:
Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 16 Jun 20.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory Opinion, AFPC/DP2SSM, dated 10 May 21.
Exhibit D:	Advisory Opinion, AFPC/DPFDD, atchs, dated 18 May 21.
Exhibit E:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to Applicant, dated 2 Sep 21.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings, as required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.