RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:            DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03361
                                        INDEX CODE 100.06
                                        COUNSEL:  None

                                        HEARING DESIRED:  No


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility  (RE)  code  be  changed  to  one  that  allows
enlistment in the Reserves.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He served his full four-year term. He elected to help close his  base  down.
When he left, there was no real out-processing department left. He was  out-
processed with the remaining individuals in his  squadron  and  believes  he
was given an incorrect RE code.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 6 Mar 89  and  served  at
Carswell AFB, TX as a bomber ground crew member.

Carswell Mental Health Clinic (MHC) medical entries  reflect  the  commander
referred the applicant to the clinic for marital problems.  The  applicant’s
certification in the Personnel Reliability  Program  (PRP)  was  temporarily
suspended on 10 Dec 91. A 16 Mar 92 MHC entry  reported  the  applicant  had
not attended group sessions since 10  Feb  92.  His  PRP  certification  was
again pulled on  9  Apr  92  due  to  lack  of  concentration  and  reported
difficulties with PRP duties. The psychiatrist  felt  that,  rather  than  a
major mental disorder, the applicant’s marginal  motivation  and  difficulty
adjusting to night  shift  work  appeared  to  be  factors.  He  recommended
permanent decertification.

In May 92, the commander permanently decertified the applicant from the  PRP
based on the recommendation from the MHC that, although he  did  not  suffer
any specific disorder, the applicant’s
personality traits, preoccupation  with  personal  problems,  difficulty  in
adjusting to shift changes, and marginal motivation had  not  improved  with
treatment.

On 4 Aug 92, the applicant did not show  for  a  scheduled  command-directed
MHC evaluation. He continued not to attend group therapy sessions. On 6  Aug
92, in a command-directed evaluation, the psychiatrist noted  the  commander
reported the applicant’s performance much improved over the last  six  weeks
and that he wanted to return the applicant to flight line duties but not  to
the PRP. The applicant related he  was  doing  well,  and  the  psychiatrist
found no mental health reason to preclude  the  applicant’s  return  to  the
flight line, at the commander’s discretion.

A 6 Jan 93 Report of Individual Person (RIP)  indicated  the  applicant  was
ineligible for promotion because he was denied reenlistment,  effective  Jul
92.

On 5 Mar 93, he was honorably discharged  in  the  grade  of  senior  airman
after four years of active service. His narrative reason for  discharge  was
“Involuntary expiration of term  of  service”  and  his  RE  code  was  “2X”
(First,  second  or  career  airman  considered   but   not   selected   for
reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP)).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPAE confirms the applicant’s  RE  code  is  correct.  He  has  not
provided any documentation that supports changing his RE  code.  Waivers  of
RE codes for enlistment are considered and approval based on  the  needs  of
the respective military service and recruiting initiatives at  the  time  of
the enlistment inquiry.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ  AFPC/DPPRSP  notes  the  applicant  was  discharged  involuntarily  upon
expiration  of  term  of  service  based  on  his  commander   denying   him
reenlistment eligibility. The reduction in force (RIF) or base  closure  had
no bearing on the applicant’s RE code, which was  based  on  his  not  being
selected for reenlistment under the SRP. DPPRSP believes the  discharge  was
consistent  with  the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements   of   the
discharge regulation and was within the  discharge  authority’s  discretion.
The applicant has not substantiated any errors or injustices and his  appeal
should be denied.

A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D.

______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF EVALUATION:

The applicant provided an undated personal statement (mailed 25 Mar 04),  an
unsigned  supporting  statement,  a  1992  mental  health  evaluation,   and
certificates. He contends his problems were caused by poor marital  choices,
which  led  to  some  temporary  problems  in  1992.    He   only   followed
suggestions/orders and did not realize the ramifications of these actions.

A complete copy of the rebuttal, with attachments, is at Exhibit F.

______________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.    The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing  law  or
regulations.

2.    The application was not timely filed; however, it is in  the  interest
of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.    Sufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of error or injustice  to  warrant  amending  the  applicant’s  RE
code. Based on his rebuttal submission, it appears his military  performance
suffered after he made an unfortunate marriage at a young age. However,  the
7 Aug 1992  mental  health  evaluation  disclosed  that  the  applicant  had
subsequently improved his attitude and performance, and no  longer  suffered
from  symptoms  of  depression.  Further,  the  psychiatrist  concluded  the
applicant  had  life  circumstances  and  marital  problems,  not  a  mental
disorder, and  was  worldwide  qualified.  The  applicant  appears  to  have
matured and adjusted following a temporary stressful  situation.  Therefore,
the Board is persuaded he should be afforded the opportunity to apply for  a
waiver to reenlist. In this respect, an RE code from the  “3”  series  would
permit the applicant to  apply  for  enlistment  and,  should  he  have  the
desirable skills and is otherwise acceptable,  the  Reserves  may  elect  to
waive his ineligibility and allow him to reenlist.  Whether  or  not  he  is
successful will depend  on  the  needs  of  the  service,  and  the  Board’s
recommendation in no way guarantees he will be allowed to reenter the  armed
services. Therefore, the majority of the Board recommends  his  reenlistment
code be changed to “3K” (Reserved for use by HQ AFPC or the AFBCMR  when  no
other RE code applies or is appropriate).
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air  Force  relating
to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that, in conjunction with  his  honorable
discharge on 5 March 1993, he was issued  a  Reenlistment  Eligibility  (RE)
code of “3K,” rather than “2X.”
_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 23 March and 6 April 2004 under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member
                 Ms. Cheryl V. Jacobson, Member

All members voted to correct the  records,  as  recommended.  The  following
documentary evidence relating to  AFBCMR  Docket  Number  BC-2003-03361  was
considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 Sep 03, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 3 Dec 03.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 10 Dec 03, w/atchs.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Dec 03.
      Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atchs.




                                             RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                             Panel Chair



AFBCMR BC-2003-03361




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:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to    , be corrected to show that, in conjunction with his
honorable discharge on 5 March 1993, he was issued a Reenlistment
Eligibility (RE) code of “3K,” rather than “2X.”





JOE G. LINEBERGER

Director

Air Force Review Boards Agency