ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-1996-00193-1
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NO
HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reentry (RE) code of 2B (separated with a general or under other than honorable conditions discharge) and general (under honorable conditions) discharge be changed to allow him reentry into the military.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 14 and 20 Nov 96, the Board considered the applicants request for reinstatement in the rank of E-4 (senior airman); back pay from 23 Feb 95 to date of reinstatement; all medical bills be paid; an assignment to Little Rock AFB; and if all of the above was not granted, he requested that his general discharge be changed to honorable and that his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed so that he may enter the Air National Guard or Reserve.
The Board found sufficient evidence to change his narrative reason for discharge to Convenience of the Government and to change his Separation Program Designator (SPD) code to JFF. The Board found insufficient evidence to warrant favorable consideration of the remainder of his requests. For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicants request, and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit G.
In his current submission, he states the circumstances surrounding his discharge were not handled fairly. He believes the military needs him and he needs it. He has many certifications and owns a mortgage company. He leads many people and hosts a foreign exchange student.
His RE code does not allow him reentry into the Air National Guard or Reserve.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of his business license with attachment, certificates, and his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.
The applicants complete submission is at Exhibit H.
Pursuant to the Boards request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation was unable to identify an arrest record on the basis of the information furnished.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
In an earlier finding, the Board determined there was insufficient evidence to warrant any corrective action regarding the applicants requests for upgrade of his general discharge and change of his RE code. We have reviewed the applicants most recent submission and find the evidence provided insufficient to warrant a reversal of our previous determination concerning his requests. The applicant again has not provided any evidence that would lead us to believe his general discharge was improper or contrary to the prevailing regulation, or the RE code was inappropriately assigned. Therefore, in view of the above, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which to recommend favorable consideration of the applicants request.
_________________________________________________________________
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.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-1996-00193-1 in Executive Session on 23 February 2010, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Panel Chair
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence was considered for Docket Number BC-1996-00193-1:
Exhibit G. AFBCMR Record of Proceedings, dated 20 Dec 96,
w/atchs.
Exhibit H. Applicants Letter, undated, w/atchs.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-1995-00482A
While we are not unsympathetic to the applicant’s situation, in the absence of any evidence which would lead us to believe that she took any action which could be construed as meeting the statutory requirements for a request for a deemed election for former spouse SBP coverage, a majority of the Board concludes that the applicant has failed to establish the existence of error or injustice. BARBARA A. WESTGATE Chair MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00245
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-00245 INDEX CODE: 112.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be granted supplemental promotion consideration for the 2008 Senior Master Sergeant (E-8) cycle, and subsequent promotion cycles, with an enlisted performance report (EPR) selection record that includes ten years of his...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2002-03005-2
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 | CY1996 | BC 1996 02127 2
For an accounting of the facts surrounding his previous request and the rationale of the Board's earlier decision, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit B. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, there was no evidence submitted to compel us to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Apr 15.
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 01011
He be reinstated into the Air National Guard (ANG) or as a member of the Air Force Reserve and his records be corrected to reflect he had no break in service. In addition to his lost time, he incurred a financial loss during this period as he was deprived of the income associated with his part-time service in the Air National Guard (ANG). While it is true that in the original iteration of this case, the relief recommended by the Board did not result in the applicant being eligible to...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04079
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04079 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her records be corrected to reflect she had six years of service. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the applicant was appropriately credited for the service she performed. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-1993-00932-2
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-1993-00932 INDEX CODE: 100.00 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 23 June 2007 ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Validation of promotion and federal recognition to the rank of colonel and such other relief that may be just and proper. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2003-02219
Applicant’s military personnel records reveal that, on 8 March 1997, the applicant was released from active duty and transferred to the Air Force Reserve under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (completion of active required service). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: HQ AFPC/DPPAOR states the applicant’s service dates and date of rank to the grade of E-4 are correct. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit F).
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-1997-03571A
_______________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: AFPC/DPPRRP recommends the application be denied. DPPRRP states that a prudent individual would be obligated to investigate the ramifications of entering into an SSB agreement prior to requesting an SSB in conjunction with early separation. As of this date, this office has not received a response.
AF | BCMR | CY1986 | BC 1986 01455; BC 1996 00399
Dr. A provides a separate opinion in the applicants 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 applicants 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 applicants case. ...