Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2001 | BC-2001-01195
Original file (BC-2001-01195.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2001-01195
		
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1. His reentry (RE) code of “2C” (Involuntarily separated with 
an honorable discharge) be changed to one that will allow him to 
reenter the military.  

2. His separation (SPD) code of “JFF” (Secretarial Authority) be 
changed.

________________________________________________________________
_

RESUME OF CASE:

On 26 Jun 02, the Board considered the applicant’s appeal and 
partially granted his request.  The applicant requested to have 
his narrative reason for separation of “Personality Disorder” be 
changed; the Board approved this portion of his request.  Based 
on the BCMR Medical Consultant’s recommendation, the Board 
opined the narrative reason for separation improperly labeled 
the reason the applicant was discharged.  His narrative reason 
for separation was changed to “Secretarial Authority” with the 
correlating SPD code.  For an accounting of the facts and 
circumstances surrounding the applicant's request and the 
rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record 
of Proceedings at Exhibit K (with Exhibit C).

On 1 May 11, the applicant requested reconsideration of changing 
his RE and SPD codes contending the RE code requires a waiver to 
reenlist and the SPD code suggests character flaws.

On 20 Jun 11, the AFBCMR notified the applicant that he did not 
provide new relevant evidence; therefore, his request did not 
meet the criteria for reconsideration by the Board.

On 5 Feb 13, the applicant requested reconsideration to change 
his RE and SPD codes stating that his psychological health is 
being called into question.  Additionally, there are inaccurate 
facts in his military records.  He submits a summary of his 
psychological status and an outline of the discrepancies that 
were found in his military records.  The applicant notes that he 
told the psychologist that he was trying to get out of the 
service in order to go back to school.  The psychologist stated 
he could get him out; the documented facts from that visit were 
fabricated in order to meet the requirements to separate an 
airman from the military.  

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of his 
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, a copy of a Psychological/Personality Assessment, a copy 
of NGB Form 22-3, Request for Waiver, a personal statement, a 
copy of a letter from the National Personnel Records Center, 
copies of letters of support, and excerpts from his military 
personnel records.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit L.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

In earlier findings, the Board determined there was insufficient 
evidence to warrant any corrective action.  After thoroughly 
reviewing the additional documentation submitted in support of 
this appeal and the evidence of record, we do not believe the 
applicant has overcome the rationale expressed in our previous 
decision.  Therefore, in view of the above, and in the absence 
of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon 
which to recommend favorable consideration of the applicant’s 
request.

________________________________________________________________
_

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the additional evidence presented 
did not demonstrate the existence of material error or 
injustice; that the application was denied without a personal 
appearance; and that the application will only be reconsidered 
upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not 
considered with this application.

________________________________________________________________
_

The following members of the Board reconsidered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2001-01195 in Executive Session on 3 Dec 13, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member




The following additional documentary evidence for Docket Number 
BC-2001-01195 was considered:

    Exhibit K.  Record of Proceedings, dated 12 Aug 02, w/atch.
    Exhibit L.  DD Form 149, Applicant, dated 5 Feb 13, w/atchs.





                                   
                                   Panel Chair






4

3





Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-00960-2

    Original file (BC-2005-00960-2.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    She was issued an RE code of 2C (involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge or an entry level separation), and an SPD code of JFX, which correlates to a narrative reason of discharge for Personality Disorder. On 21 Jun 06, the Board agreed with the AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s determination that the case should be denied because her Adjustment Disorder placed her and the Air Force at an unacceptable risk for a recurrence of her symptoms should she be exposed again to the stressful...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2003-02068-4

    Original file (BC-2003-02068-4.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    THIRD ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02068-4 INDEX CODE: 110.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code and narrative reason for separation be changed. The psychiatrist stated neither his evaluation nor that of the psychological consultant could support a diagnosis of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02843-1

    Original file (BC-2007-02843-1.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    ______________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2007- 02843 in Executive Session on 13 Jun 08, under the provisions of AFI 36- 2603: Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair Ms. Mary Jane Mitchell, Member Ms. Audrey Y. Davis, Member By majority vote, the Board recommended granting the requested relief. Exhibit J. Applicant’s Reconsideration Request, dated 4 Mar 08, w/atchs. THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ Chair AFBCMR...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-1992-01342-2

    Original file (BC-1992-01342-2.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The AFBCMR Staff assumed the applicant was referring to his most recent case (BC-2004-02624), which was denied on 27 Dec 04, and in a letter dated 3 May 06 (Exhibit K), requested he provide copies of documents he alluded to his 14 Feb 06 submission. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: After reviewing the applicant’s latest submissions, a majority of the Board reconsidered his appeal but found the documentation insufficient to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01185A

    Original file (BC-2005-01185A.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01195 INDEX CODE: 131.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be considered for promotion to the grade of colonel by Special Selection Boards (SSBs) for the CY03B and CY04C Colonel Central Selection Boards to correct assignment errors. On 16 March 2005, the applicant...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2002-03005-2

    Original file (BC-2002-03005-2.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the opinion of the BCMR Medical Consultant that the condition leading to his separation was an “Adjustment Disorder” rather than a “Personality Disorder,” the Board concluded the applicant’s records should be changed to show he received an honorable discharge under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, paragraph 1.2, (Secretarial Authority), with Separation Program Designator (SPD) code “KFF.” However, the Board found the RE Code issued at the time of the applicant’s separation accurately...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1986 | BC 1986 01455; BC 1996 00399

    Dr. A provides a separate opinion in the applicant’s case, concluding the applicant does not have a personality disorder, and never had a personality disorder. In fact, contrary to the circumstances in the noted case, Counsel has argued that the applicant’s service over the course of the years between his service in Vietnam and his adjustment disorder diagnosis was impeccable and has presented no evidence to indicate there were similar circumstances at play in the applicant’s case. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-1986-01455; BC-1996-00399

    His records be corrected to reflect he was retired for physical disability for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and/or major depression, rather than discharged for a personality disorder. Dr. A provides a separate opinion in the applicant’s case, concluding the applicant does not have a personality disorder, and never had a personality disorder. In fact, contrary to the circumstances in the noted case, Counsel has argued that the applicant’s service over the course of the years...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-1986-01455; BC-1996-00399

    Dr. A provides a separate opinion in the applicant’s case, concluding the applicant does not have a personality disorder, and never had a personality disorder. In fact, contrary to the circumstances in the noted case, Counsel has argued that the applicant’s service over the course of the years between his service in Vietnam and his adjustment disorder diagnosis was impeccable and has presented no evidence to indicate there were similar circumstances at play in the applicant’s case. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02688

    Original file (BC-2004-02688.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant was administratively separated with an entry level separation for a mental condition that existed prior to service, that interfered with military training and was determined to be incompatible with continued military service. However, after a thorough review of the evidence presented, in particular the assessment by the Medical Consultant, we are sufficiently persuaded the applicant’s reason for separation and SPD code did not truly reflect the diagnosed condition which...