Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9802388
Original file (9802388.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY R E C w B 2 4  lggg 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NUMBER:  98- 02388 
COUNSEL:  NONE 

HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

Applicant  requests that  his  Reenlistment Eligibility  (RE) Code  of 
2C,  issued  in  conjunction  with  his  2 3   June  1998  entry  level 
separation, be  upgraded to a  1.  (Examiner's  Note:  RE-2C denotes 
entry  level  separation  without  characterization  of  service.) 
Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A. 

The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and 
provided  advisory  opinions  to  the  Board  recommending  the 
application  be  denied  (Exhibit C). 
The  advisory  opinions  were 
forwarded to the applicant for review and response  (Exhibit D).  As 
of this date, no response has been received by this office. 

After  careful  consideration  of  applicant's  request  and  the 
available  evidence  of  record, 'we  find  insufficient  evidence  of 
error  or  injustice  to  warrant  corrective  action.  The  facts  and 
opinions stated in the advisory opinions appear to be based  on the 
evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant.  Absent 
persuasive evidence applicant was denied rights to which entitled, 
appropriate regulations were not followed, or appropriate standards 
were not applied, we find no basis to disturb the existing record. 

Accordingly, applicant's request is denied. 

The Board  staff is directed  to  inform applicant of this decision. 
Applicant  should also be  informed that this decision is  final and 
will  only  be  reconsidered  upon  the  presentation  of  new  relevant 
evidence  which  was  not  reasonably  available  at  the  time  the 
application was filed. 

Members  of  the  Board,  Mr.  Benedict  A.  Kausal  IV, Mr.  Patrick  R. 
Wheeler, and Mrs. Margaret A.  Zook, considered this application on 
5 January  1 9 9 9   in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  Air  Force 
Instruction 3 6 - 2 6 0 3   and the governing statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552. 

-- 

lBenedict A. Kausal IV 
Panel Chair 

Exhibits : 
A.  Applicant's DD Form 1 4 9  
B.  Available Master Personnel Records 
C.  Advisory Opinions 
D.  SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinions 

D E P A R T M E N T   OF T H E  A I R   FORCE 

H E A D Q U A R T E R S   AIR  F O R C E   P E R S O N N E L  C E N T E R  

R A N D O L P H  AIR  F O R C E   B A S E  T E X A S  

MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR 

FROM:  HQ AFPCDPPRS 

550 C Street West Ste 1 1  
Randolph AFB TX  78 150-47 13 

The applicant, while serving in the grade of airman basic, was separated from the 

Air Force 23 Jun 98 under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Entry Level Performance and 
Conduct) with an uncharacterized discharge. He served 06 months and 07 days total active 
service. 

Requested Action.  The applicant is requesting his reentry code 2C be changed in 

order for him to reenlist. 

Basis for Request.  Applicant does not claim an injustice in the discharge he 

received only three (3) months ago. 

Facts.  The applicant was notified by his commander on 1 1  Jun 98 that discharge 

action had been initiated against him for entry level performance and conduct.  Applicant had 
failed to make satisfactory progress in the Correctional Custody program.  Specifically, he 
received three letters of counseling and 27 AETC Forms. Discrepancy Reports, for numerous 
infractions ranging from inspection failures to not marching.  In addition, he had received Article 
15 punishment for wrongfidly consuming alcoholic beverages while under the legal drinking age 
of 21.  He also failed to obey a lawful general instruction by wrongfilly consuming alcoholic 
beverages in the student dormitory.  The commander advised applicant that if his recommendation 
is approved, that his discharge would be described as entry level separation and that he would be 
ineligible for reenlistment in the Air Force.  He was advised he had a right to consult counsel and 
the right to submit statements in his own behalf.  He did consult counsel and submitted a written 
statement in own behalf appealing for another chance to prove himself.  On 22 Jun 98, the 
discharge authority approved the Entry Level Separation for performance and conduct.  Airmen 
are given entry level separatioduncharacterized service characterizatian when separation action is 
initiated against them in the first 180 days of continuous active service. 

Discussion.  This case has been reviewed for separation processing and there are 

no errors or irregularities causing an injustice to the applicant.  The discharge complies with 
directives in effect at the time of his discharge.  The records indicate member’s military service 
was reviewed and appropriate action was taken. 

Recommendation.  Applicant did not identie any specific errors in the discharge 

processing nor provide facts which warrant a change in his reason for discharge.  Accordingly, we 
recommend applicant's request be denied.  He has filed a timely request. 

JOHN C. WOOTEN, DAF 
Military Personnel Mgmt Spec 
Separations Branch 
Dir of Personnel Program Management 

DEPARTMENT  O F  THE A I R   F O R C E  

H E A D Q U A R T E R S  AIR  FORCE  PERSONNELCENTER 

R A N D O L P H  AIR  FORCE  BASE TEXAS 

0 1  OCT  1998 

MEMORANDUM FOR  AFBCMR 

FROM:  HQ AFPC/DPPAES 

550 C Street West Ste 10 
Randolph AFB TX  78 150-4712 

We conducted a review of applicant’s case file.  The Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) 

Code “2C” is correct.  The type of discharge drove assignment of the RE code. 

k 

KATHLEEN R. LOPEZ, MSgt, U S d  
Special Programs and BCMR Manager 
Dir of Personnel Program Management 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802388

    Original file (9802388.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The commander advised applicant that if his recommendation is approved, that his discharge would be described as entry level separation and that he would be ineligible for reenlistment in the Air Force. The records indicate member’s military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9801989

    Original file (9801989.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant’s request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Available Master Personnel Records C. Advisory Opinions D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinions E. Applicant’s Response D E P A R T M E N T OF T H E A I R F O R C E H E A D Q U A R T E R S AIR FORCE P E R S O N N E L C E N T E R R A N D O L P H AIR FORCE B A S E TEXAS AUG 3 11998 MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR FROM: HQ AFPCDPPRS 550 C...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9801584

    Original file (9801584.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant’s request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the ‘“application be denied (Exhibit C) . Requested Action. The commander advised applicant that if his recommendation is approved, that his discharge would be described as entry level separation and that he would be ineligible for reenlistment in the Air Force.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9801555

    Original file (9801555.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The commander advised applicant that if his recommendation is approved, that his discharge would be described as entry level separation and that he would be ineligible for reenlistment in the Air Force. Applicant did not identifjl any specific errors in the discharge processing nor provide facts which warrant a change in the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9801633

    Original file (9801633.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). - After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action. Applicant did not identi@ any specific errors in the discharg&progessing nor provide facts which warrant a change in the discharge he received.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802333

    Original file (9802333.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The facts and opinions stated in the advisory opinion appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant. The applicant alleges miscounseling by the Military Personnel Flight (MPF) regarding the option to reenlist.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9800676

    Original file (9800676.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9702087

    Original file (9702087.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON DC Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 97-02087 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 1 16), it is directed that: provisions of AFI 36-3208 by reason of “Secretarial Authority,” with separation code “KFF.” records of the Department of the Air Force relating to e...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9701398

    Original file (9701398.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 28 Apr 98, the applicant provided additional evidence and requested that the Board reconsider her application (Exhibit F) . The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The discharge complies with directives in effect at the time of her discharge.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9800746

    Original file (9800746.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The commander advised applicant that if his recommendation is approved, that his discharge would be described as entry level separation and that he would be ineligible for reenlistment in the Air Force. Applicant did not identifjl any specific errors in the discharge processing nor provide facts which warrant the stated reason for...