'AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00580
1 6 OC'T 'i998
COUNSEL: None
HEARING DESIRED: Yes
,Applicant requests that his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be
changed so that he can reenter the Air Force.
Applicant's
submission is at Exhibit A.
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request
and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the
application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were
forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D).
As of this date, no response has been received by this office.
After careful consideration of applicant's request and the
available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of
error or injustice to warrant corrective action. The facts and
opinions stated in the advisory opinions appear to be based on
the evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant.
Absent persuasive evidence applicant was denied rights to which
entitled, appropriate regulations were not followed, or
appropriate standards were not applied, we find no basis to
disturb the existing record.
Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.
The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been
shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will
materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.
The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision.
Applicant should also be informed that this decision is final and
will only be reconsidered upon the presentation of new relevant
evidence which was not reasonably available at the time the
application was filed.
Members of the Board Mr. Vaughn E. Schlunz, Mr. Richard A.
Peterson, and Mr. Patrick R. Wheeler considered this application
on 29 September 1998 in accordance with the provisions of Air
Force Instruction 36-2603, and the governing statute, 10, U.S.C.
1552.
Exhibits :
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinions
D. AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinions
d+L@+
VAUGH E. SCHLUNZ
Panel Chair
V
MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR
FROM: BCMR Medical Consultant
1535 Command Drive, EE Wing, 3rd Floor
Andrews AFB MD 20762-7002
14 April 1998
98-00580
P
*
REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant was discharged after completion of his required
period of service on 1 October 1995 having been denied reenlistment for failure in the alcohol
rehabilitation program. He applies now to change the reenlistment code to allow him to return
to the military.
FACTS: The applicant self-referred himself to the substance abuse program at Elmendorf
AFB on 9 November 1994 and was seen in the outpatient program over the next couple of
months. A note dated 12 January 1995 indicates the applicant was not complying with Track Ill
requirements and was referred for Track IV in-patient rehabilitation, remaining in the rehab
center from 19 January to 16 February 1995. Upon completion of this program, he wsa
followed appropriately, but a note on June gth indicates he had continued drinking with his first
relaose having come 2 months prior. Since this constituted a failure of alcohol rehabilitation, his
request for separation submitted in July 1995 was accepted, and his discharge occurred as
noted above.
DISCUSSION: The applicant, in his letter of request, states that he never had a problem
with alcohol, either in the Air Force or since his discharge, and he cites a Department of
Veterans Affairs diagnosis of depression with psychotic features that was made in March 1998
as evidence for his case. It is noted that a feature of his presentation on his self-referral was
depression which was considered possibly associated with the use of alcohol, but the
underlying problem for which rehabilitation was begun was clearly the alcohol dependence
noted in his records. The 2H reenlistment code on his DD Form 214 is appropriate for his
failure in the rehabilitation program, and must, therefore, remain unchanged. Nothing is found
in the records reviewed that would indicate an error in assignment of this code.
RECOMMENDATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that the applicant’s
request for change in his reenlistment code should be denied.
FREDERICK W. HORNICK, Col., USAF, MC, FS
Chief Medical Consultant, AFBCMR
Medical Advisor SAF Personnel Council
D E P A R T M E N T O F T H E A I R F O R C E
H E A D Q U A R T E R S AIR FORCE P E R S O N N E L C E N T E R
R A N D O L P H A I R FORCE B A S E T E X A S
MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR
FROM: HQ AFPCDPPAE
550 C Street West Ste 10
Randolph AFB TX 78150-4712
The applicant requests his Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed to a favorable
4
code to permit reentry into the Air Force. He has filed a timely request within three years of
discovering alleged error.
The applicant was discharged on 1 Oct 95 with an honorable characterization of service
after serving four years, four months, and 15 days active and inactive service. He received an RE
code of “2H: Participating in Track 4 or 5 of the Substance Abuse Reorientation and Treatment
(SART) program for alcohol, or has failed to complete Track 4.’’
In reviewing applicant’s military personnel records, we discovered a 28 Aug 95 Records
Review Listing confirming his RE code as “2H.” Additionally, applicant has not submitted
proof that he completed follow-on support prior to separation.
Considering the above, we recommend denial of applicant’s request for change of RE
code. However, if the decision is to grant the relief sought, applicant’s record should be
corrected to reflect his RE code as “3K: Reserved for use by HQ AFPC or the Air Force Board
for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) when no other reenlistment eligibility code
applies or is appropriate.”
Chief, Skills Mdgement Branch
Dir of Personnel Program Management
After consulting counsel, applicant submitted a statement in his own behalf requesting an honorable discharge. He had completed 1 year, 2 months and 15 days and was serving in the grade of airman (E-2) at the time of discharge. Letter to Board for Correction of Air Force Records, RE: Discharge upgrade/DD form 293, November 6, 1997 8.
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). He received an RE code of “2H: Participating in Track 4 or 5 of the Substance Abuse Reorientation and Treatment (SART) program for drugs, or has failed to complete Track 4.” Applicant’s military personnel records indicate he received a general discharge for “A Pattern of Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary Infractions.” This type of...
By completing all requirements, the RE code should have reflected a code which would allow him to reenlist. A complete copy of the DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 27 Jan 98 for review and response. Therefore, his separation and RE codes accurately reflect the reason for his separation and his status vis-a-vis the alcohol rehabilitation program at the time of his separation.
In an application dated 7 July 1990, he requested that Blocks 9a, 9c and 13 on his DD Form 214 should also be changed in view of his RE code being changed to 1J. A copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit C. g : The Military Personnel Technician, AFMPC/DPMARS2, reviewed the application and states that if applicant had been given an RE code of 1J at the time he separated, he would have been released from active duty and would have fulfilled his MSO in the Air Force Reserve. ...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). He applies now to change his reenlistment code from "2Q" to one that will allow reentry to the military if and when he might choose.
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-02290
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial indicating that individuals who have been entered into an alcohol rehabilitation and treatment program, then either fails to complete the program or demonstrates evidence of recurrent use of...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action.
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 97-01120 Nov c 4 1897 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF.OF STAFF Under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code, Air Force Instruction 36-2603, and having assured compliance with the provisions of the above regulation, the decision of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records is announced, and it is directed that: The pertinent mi Force relating to to show that: t of the Air be...
- MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that: ds of the Department of the Air Force relating to- corrected to show that at the time 0fr)discharge on 15 March t Eligibility (RE) code of “3K.” V Air Force Review Boards Agency -- I , AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03271
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 14 December 1984 in the grade of airman basic. He had not completed the program at the time of his discharge from active duty. The evidence of record indicates the applicant had been entered into the Alcohol Rehabilitation program and had not completed the program at the time of his separation.