RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03768 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His Reentry (RE) code of 2C (Involuntarily separated with an 
honorable discharge) be changed. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

His RE code should be changed to 4A (Separated for hardship or 
dependency reasons), 2Q (Medically retired or discharged), or 4K 
(Airman is pending evaluation by MEB/PEB) because he feels that 
each more accurately represents the circumstances of his 
separation. His diagnosed condition (chronic adjustment 
disorder with anxiety, coupled with personality disorder, not 
otherwise specified) should have warranted a medical review 
board and not an administrative separation. The severe state of 
his emotional condition prompted his psychiatrist, squadron 
superintendent, and squadron commander to seek an expedient 
means of separation that was hastily conceived and inappropriate 
to the circumstances. He has accomplished much since his 
discharge in terms of his education; however, no matter how much 
he is able to accomplish, he will never be able to erase this 
black spot on his record and he will continue to be turned away 
from Federal employment. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides an expanded 
statement and copies of his resume, certificates, letters of 
appreciation, his college transcripts, and excerpts from his 
military personnel records. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant’s military personnel records indicate he enlisted 
in the Regular Air Force in the grade of airman basic (E-1) on 
11 Jun 02. 


On 9 Mar 06, the applicant was notified by his commander of his 
intent to recommend his discharge from the Air Force for a 
condition that interfered with military service; specifically, 
for mental disorders-adjustment disorder. The basis for the 
action was the applicant’s diagnosis of adjustment disorder and 
anxiety, which was determined to be severe enough that his 
ability to function in the military environment was 
significantly impaired. 

 

On 9 Mar 06, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant 
acknowledged receipt of the letter of notification and elected 
to submit a statement in his behalf. The case was found to be 
legally sufficient on 21 Mar 08 and the discharge authority 
approved the commander’s recommendation, directing the applicant 
be discharged for conditions that interfere with military 
service. 

 

On 23 Mar 06, the applicant was honorably discharged and 
credited with 3 years, 9 months, and 13 days of total active 
service. His narrative reason for separation was “Personality 
Disorder.” 

 

On 30 Aug 07, the Board considered the applicant’s 24 Nov 06 
request to change his narrative reason for separation of 
“Personality Disorder.” While he acknowledged that his 
narrative reason for separation was appropriately assigned, he 
contended that it was an injustice for him to carry the stigma 
of “Personality Disorder,” as it hindered his efforts to obtain 
employment. After considering all the facts and evidence in the 
case, the Board determined the applicant’s narrative reason for 
separation was appropriate to the circumstances and assigned in 
accordance with the requirements of the governing directive at 
the time of his separation; however, in view of the fact that 
“Adjustment Disorder” was recently approved as a narrative 
reason for separation, and noting the applicant was discharged 
for an adjustment disorder, the Board recommended that his 
narrative reason for separation be corrected in the interest of 
justice. As a result, the applicant was issued a new 
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, with a narrative reason for separation of “Secretarial 
Authority” and a separation program designator (SPD) code of 
“KFF.” 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of 
the Air Force at Exhibit C. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or injustice. The applicant was involuntarily 
discharged with an honorable character of service. The RE code 


of “2C” is required based on the circumstances in accordance 
with AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment in the USAF. While the Board 
approved the applicant’s previous request to change his 
narrative reason for separation due to a long-standing 
recognition by medical authorities of the need to lessen the 
stigma of this type of discharge, it noted the applicant’s 
separation was proper and in compliance with the appropriate 
instructions and there was insufficient evidence of an error or 
injustice with respect to the discharge action. The RE code of 
“2C” is appropriate to the circumstances of the applicant’s 
separation, and the previous correction to his narrative reason 
for separation does not nullify the fact that he was 
involuntarily discharged with an honorable character of service. 

 

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 17 Dec 10 for review and comment within 30 days. 
As of this date, no response has been received by this office 
(Exhibit F). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

 

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

 

2. The application was timely filed. 

 

3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. We took 
notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the 
merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and 
recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary 
responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our 
conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or 
injustice. The applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however 
he has presented no evidence which would lead us to believe the 
RE code of “2C” was not appropriately assigned or did not 
accurately reflect the circumstances of his entry-level 
separation. We note the Board has previously reviewed the 
separation action and determined it was proper and in compliance 
with the appropriate governing directives. Despite this 
finding, the Board recommended the applicant’s narrative reason 
for separation be changed to “Secretarial Authority” to lessen 
the stigma of the original narrative reason of “Personality 
Disorder.” However, the Board’s action in this respect in no way 
serves to nullify the fact the applicant was furnished an entry-


level separation, which continues to serve as the legitimate 
basis for the assigned RE code of “2C.” Therefore, in the 
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to 
recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

 

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material 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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2010-03768 in Executive Session on 6 Jul 11, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Sep 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 3 Nov 10. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Dec 10. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair