Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9801976
Original file (9801976.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  98-01976

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The applicant requests  that  his  Reenlistment  Eligibility  (RE)  code  be
changed to allow his immediate reenlistment.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The reasons the applicant believes the records to be in error or unjust  and
the evidence submitted in support of the appeal are at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts  pertaining  to  this  application,  extracted  from  the
applicant's military records, are contained in the letters prepared  by  the
appropriate offices of the Air Force.  Accordingly,  there  is  no  need  to
recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Separations Branch, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed  this  application  and  states
that the applicant did not identify any specific  errors  in  the  discharge
processing nor provide facts which warrant a  change  in  the  discharge  he
received.  Therefore, they recommend denial of his request.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

The  Special  Programs  and  BCMR  Manager,   AFPC/DPPAES,   reviewed   this
application and states that the RE code of “2C” is correct.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Complete  copies  of  the  Air  Force  evaluations  were  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 12 October 1998, for review and response.  As of this date,  no
response has been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.    The applicant has 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.    Sufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence  of  probable  error  or  injustice  to  warrant   upgrading   the
applicant’s RE code to  “3K”.   In  this  respect,  we  note  the  applicant
successfully completed basic training and was attending technical school  at
Lackland AFB when  he  requested  separation.   The  applicant  states  that
shortly after he arrived at Lackland AFB, he discovered that a woman he  had
been involved with was pregnant.  He  asked  the  woman  to  marry  him  and
requested separation to be with his pregnant, future wife.  In view of  this
and in order to provide the applicant the opportunity to apply for entry  in
the Armed Forces, we recommend his RE-code  be  upgraded  to  RE  code  “3K”
(Secretarial Authority) which will render him eligible to reenlist, with  an
approved waiver.  Whether or not he is successful will depend on  the  needs
of the service and our recommendation in no way guarantees that he  will  be
allowed to return to any branch of the  service.   Therefore,  we  recommend
his records be corrected to the extend indicated below.


THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air  Force  relating
to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that at the  time  of  his  discharge  on
27 September 1990, he was issued a Reenlistment  Eligibility  (RE)  code  of
“3K.”


The following members of the Board considered this application in  Executive
Session on 12 January 1999, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                  Mr. Vaughn E. Schlunz, Panel Chair
                  Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Member
                  Mr. Frederick R. Beaman, III, Member
                 Mr. Phillip E. Horton, Examiner (without vote)

All members voted to correct the records,  as  recommended.   The  following
documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 July 98, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 26 Aug 98.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAES, dated 22 Sep 98.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 12 Oct 98.




             VAUGHN E. SCHLUNZ
                                  Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9900911

    Original file (9900911.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 17 Sep 98, applicant was notified by his commander that she was recommending that he be discharged from the Air Force for fraudulent entry. The records indicate the applicant’s military service was properly reviewed and appropriate action was taken. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Special Programs & BCMR Manager, AFPC/DPPAES, also reviewed this application and indicated that a review of the applicant’s case file was conducted and the RE code is...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 0001423

    Original file (0001423.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01423 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His uncharacterized, entry-level separation be changed to reflect that he was honorably discharged for Convenience of the Government. The Medical Consultant further recommends that the Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | 0202847

    Original file (0202847.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to her discharge are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied. As of this date, this office has received no response. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02099

    Original file (BC-2002-02099.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    In a rebuttal to the Air Force evaluation, applicant now requests that she be reinstated to active duty in the Air Force, promoted to the grade of technical sergeant (TSgt) (E-6) and allowed to cross train into the Paralegal career field she was approved for prior to her discharge. The applicant’s complete statement is at Exhibit L. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPAE recommends that the applicant’s RE code be changed to “3K,”...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01351

    Original file (BC-2003-01351.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He received a letter of counseling (LOC) on 17 October 2001 for being late for duty. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we are not persuaded that his contention of no longer being affected by “previous flaws”, in and by themselves, are sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 8 May 03.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01234

    Original file (BC-2003-01234.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, the recoupment of bonus monies is driven by the assigned SPD code. The AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D. DFAS-POCC/DE recommends the applicant’s request to change his SPD code be denied. The applicant originally requested his RE code also be changed; however, AFPC/DPPRSP has administratively corrected his records to reflect he was issued RE code “1J.” Applicant’s contentions regarding the separation program designator (SPD) he was assigned at the time of his discharge are...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9901294

    Original file (9901294.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that the applicant’s reenlistment code be changed to “3K.” A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Chief, Skills Management Branch, Directorate, Personnel Program Management, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, also reviewed the application and states that since the type of separation received drives RE codes, applicant’s code is correct as reflected. Therefore, we agree with the recommendation of the Medical Consultant to change the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01551

    Original file (BC-2002-01551.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01551 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code of 2C be changed to make him eligible to enlist in the Armed Forces. The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE states that the RE Code of 2C (involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201551

    Original file (0201551.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01551 INDEX CODE 100.06 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code of 2C be changed to make him eligible to enlist in the Armed Forces. The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE states that the RE Code of 2C (involuntarily separated with an honorable...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201565

    Original file (0201565.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    He was not told he had only 30 days to cancel the extension should the assignment get cancelled. On 29 April 2002, applicant submitted an AF Form 1411 requesting the extension be cancelled. Reenlistment personnel have also confirmed that TSgt W directed them not to do anything at that time, including not signing the form, but to direct him to complete a DD Form 149.