RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-01012
            INDEX CODE:  110.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE)  code  of  "2C"  (Involuntarily  separated
with   an   honorable   discharge;   or   entry-level   separation   without
characterization of service) be changed to a code that would  allow  him  to
reenlist in the service.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

On 28 November 2001, his RE code was changed from  "2B"  (separated  with  a
general or under other than honorable conditions  discharge).   The  correct
code should have been a code that allowed reentry into the  Air  Force.   He
is currently a police officer for the  city  of  Montgomery,  Alabama.   His
duties consist of protecting  and  serving  the  citizens.   He  desires  to
reenlist to protect and serve his country.

In support of his request, the applicant  provided  a  copy  of  his  police
identification  and  documentation  extracted  from  his  civilian   medical
records.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 14 April 1999  in  the  grade
of airman basic.  He was progressively  promoted  to  the  grade  of  airman
having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank  of  14  October
1999.  On 4 November 1999, applicant was notified by his  commander  of  his
intent to recommend that he be discharged  from  the  Air  Force  under  the
provisions of AFPD 36-32 and AFI  36-3208,  paragraph  5.14.   The  specific
reason for this action was a  Medical  Evaluation  Report  dated  1  October
1999,  which  indicates  the  applicant  had  been  diagnosed  with  chronic
inguinal strain.  He reported this information  on  his  Standard  Form  93,
Report of Medical History.  It was determined this condition  existed  prior
to service and had not been  permanently  aggravated  by  service.   He  was
advised of his rights  in  this  matter  and  acknowledged  receipt  of  the
notification on that same date.  The applicant waived his right  to  consult
counsel and elected not  to  submit  statements  on  his  own  behalf.   The
discharge authority concurred with the recommendations and directed that  he
be  discharged  with  an  honorable   discharge,   without   probation   and
rehabilitation.  Applicant was discharged on 12 November 1999.  He served  6
months and 29 days on active duty.

In 2001, the applicant filed an application with the  Air  Force  Board  for
Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) requesting change of his RE code  of
“2B” to allow him to return to active duty.  The AFBCMR  Medical  Consultant
recommended the RE code be changed to “2C.”  The Medical  Consultant  stated
a member who is honorably discharged for circumstances such  as  experienced
by the applicant should receive a code  of  “2C”  signifying  the  honorable
characteristic of his discharge.  Having a “2B” code would indicate  receipt
of an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC)  or  general  discharge,
something that was clearly not the case with the applicant.  With  a  proper
“2C” code, applicant could be considered for  further  service  were  he  to
present  incontrovertible  evidence  that  the  problem  for  which  he  was
discharged had been resolved and that application  through  HQ  AETC  for  a
waiver would be feasible.  His case was administratively  corrected  and  he
was issued a DD Form 215, Correction to the DD Form 214, with the  corrected
RE code of “2C.”

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends  denial.   The  Medical  Consultant
states the applicant provided a letter from his  civilian  family  physician
stating he is free from any problem.  This evaluation is  rather  vague  and
it could not be  determined  whether,  and  to  what  extent,  the  previous
inguinal problem was addressed.  It is  unknown  if  corrective  action  was
taken.  In order to reconsider the applicant for reenlistment, it  would  be
necessary to review a detailed statement regarding the history  and  current
status of the applicant’s inguinal condition.  Detailed surgical  evaluation
and appropriate diagnostic studies would be helpful to  determine  the  risk
of recurrence and must be accomplished before resubmission of his request.

The Medical Consultant’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 9 November 2007, the  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the  applicant  for
review and comment within 30 days  (Exhibit  D).   As  of  this  date,  this
office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.    The applicant has not 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.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or injustice.  After reviewing the evidence of  record
and  the  applicant’s  submission,  it  is  our  opinion  that   given   the
circumstances surrounding his separation from the Air  Force,  the  RE  code
assigned appears to  be  proper  and  in  compliance  with  the  appropriate
directives.  As  recommended  by  the  AFBCMR  Medical  Consultant,  if  the
applicant were to provide a detailed statement regarding current  status  of
his inguinal  condition  along  with  a  detailed  surgical  evaluation  and
appropriate  diagnostic  studies,  we  would  be  willing  to   review   the
additional information for possible reconsideration.  Accordingly, we  agree
with the opinion provided by the AFBCMR Medical  Consultant  and  adopt  his
rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant  has  not  been
the victim of an error or injustice.  In the  absence  of  evidence  to  the
contrary, we find no compelling  basis  to  recommend  granting  the  relief
sought.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or injustice; the application  was  denied  without  a
personal appearance; and 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 considered this application in  Executive
Session on 10 January 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. James W. Russell, III, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Mark J. Novitski, Member
                 Mrs. Lea Gallogly, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR  Docket  Number  BC-
2007-01012 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 March 2007, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant,
               dated 6 November 2007.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 November 2007.





                       JAMES W. RUSSELL III
                       Panel Chair