AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 
DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00686 
COUNSEL: NONE 
HEARING DESIRED: NO 

IN THE MATTER OF: 
   
   
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
1.  Her  reentry  (RE)  code  of  2C,  which  denotes  “Involuntary 
separation  with  an  honorable  discharge;  or  entry-level 
separation without characterization of service” be changed.  
 
2.  Her  narrative  reason  for  separation  and  separation  code 
“Conditions  that  Interfere  with  Military  Service  –  Not 
Disability” be changed. 
 
3.  Her  records  reflect  she  served  four  years  of  active  duty 
service and was separated normally. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
1.  Her  discharge  under  AFR  39-10,  Administrative  Separation  of 
Airmen  was  directed  by  a  commander  who  bullied  and  pushed  her 
because she was prejudiced towards her interracial marriage.   
 
2.  Her  commander  did  not  like  her;  carried  out  her  prejudice 
through her position of power; and pushed her so hard until she 
broke and was discharged under AFR 39-10.   
 
3. She suffered from depression but not to the point where she 
should have been discharged.  
 
In  support  of  her  request,  the  applicant  provides  copies  of 
Standard Form 600, Chronological Record of Medical Care; AF Form 
422, Physical Profile Serial Report, and a personal statement.  
 The  applicant's  complete  submission,  with  attachments,  is  at 
Exhibit A. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
On  6  October  1989,  the  applicant  enlisted  in  the  Regular  Air 
Force.  
 
On  15  Oct  91,  the  applicant  was  diagnosed  with  an  Adjustment 
Disorder  with  Mixed  Disturbance  of  Emotion  and  Conduct; 
Occupation Problem; and Mixed Personality Traits with Histrionic 

and  Narcissistic  Features  by  the  Mental  Health  Services.  
Because  of  her  diagnosis,  she  no  longer  had  the  capacity  to 
adapt to military standards.   
 
On  29  Oct  91,  the  applicant  was  notified  of  her  commander’s 
intent  to  recommend  that  she  be  discharged  from  the  Air  Force 
under the provisions of AFR 39-10, for Conditions that Interfere 
with  Military  Service,  specifically,  Mental  Disorders.    The 
applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge, 
consulted  with  counsel  and  submitted  a  statement  on  her  own 
behalf. 
 
On  27  Nov  91,  the  case  file  was  determined  to  be  legally 
sufficient  to  warrant  discharge.    The  discharge  authority 
approved  her  discharge  and  directed  an  honorable  discharge, 
without the offer of probation and rehabilitation.   
 
On 4 Dec 91, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force in 
the grade of airman first class with an honorable discharge, in 
accordance  with  AFR  39-10,  (Conditions  that  Interfere  with 
Military Service).  She served 2 years, 1 month and 29 days of 
total active service.  
 
On 5 Mar 96, the AFBCMR considered the applicant’s request that 
her  honorable  discharge  be  set  aside  and  she  be  reinstated  to 
active  duty  with  back  pay.    On  10  Apr  96,  the  applicant’s 
records  were  corrected  to  show  that  on  4  Dec  91,  she  was 
honorably  discharged  under  the  provisions  of  AFR  39-10, 
(Conditions  that  Interfere  with  Military  Service  –  Not 
Disability), rather than Conditions that Interfere with Military 
Service  –  Not  Disability-  Character  and  Behavior  and  issued  a 
Separation Program Designator (SPD) of JFV. 
 
Although  the  Board  determined  that  her  narrative  reason  for 
separation  was  in  error,  they  found  insufficient  evidence  to 
warrant reinstating the applicant to active duty, and therefore, 
denied her request.  
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
HQ  AFPC/DPSOS  recommends  denial  of  the  applicant’s  request  to 
change her narrative reason for separation and separation code. 
DPSOS  states  that  based  on  documentation  on  file  in  the 
applicant’s  master  personnel  records,  the  applicant’s  discharge 
to  include  the  narrative  reason  for  separation  and  separation 
code  was  consistent  with  the  procedural  and  substantive 
requirements  of  the  discharge  instruction  and  was  within  the 
discretion of the discharge authority.  
 
The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C.  
 

HQ  AFPC/DPSOA  recommends  denial  of  the  applicant’s  request  to 
change her RE code.  DPSOA states the applicant’s RE code 2C is 
required per AFI 36-2606, Reenlistments in the United States Air 
Force,  based  on  her  involuntary  discharge  with  an  honorable 
character of service.   
 
DPSOA states the applicant did not provide proof of an error or 
injustice  pertaining  to  her  RE  code,  but  states  her  commander 
did not like her and carried out prejudice against her. 
 
The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
Copies  of  the  Air  Force  evaluations  were  forwarded  to  the 
applicant  on  8  Jun  12  for  review  and  comment  within  30 days 
(Exhibit  E).    As  of  this  date,  this  office  has  not  received  a 
response. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 
 
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing 
law or regulations. 
 
2. The application was timely 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 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  that  the 
applicant  has  not  been  the  victim  of  an  error  or  injustice.  
Therefore,  in view of the above and in the absence of evidence 
to  the  contrary,  we  find  no  basis  upon  which  to  recommend 
granting the relief sought.  
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 
 
The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  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. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 

  
 

Panel Chair 
Member 
Member 

 
The  following  members  of  the  Board  considered  AFBCMR  Docket 
Number  BC-2012-00686  in  Executive  Session  on  13  Sep  12,  under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 
 
 
 
The following documentary evidence was considered: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 Feb 12, w/atchs. 
Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 
Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, Letter, dated 23 Apr 12. 
Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 21 May 12. 
Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Jun 12.  

Panel Chair