RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-02967
INDEX CODE: 100
COUNSEL: None
HEARING DESIRED: No
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to a favorable code.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Her enlistment was declined due to financial irresponsibility of the
American Express Card. She paid her debt and was given a Letter of
Reprimand (LOR) and allowed to receive separation pay and “TAMP
ELIGIBLE.”
Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant’s Total Active Federal Military Service Date (TAFMSD)
was 23 Mar 87.
Applicant’s Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) profile follows:
PERIOD ENDING OVERALL EVALUATION
22 Mar 88 9
22 Mar 89 9
22 Mar 90 4 (New rating system)
22 Mar 91 4
11 Nov 91 3
7 Jun 92 4
7 Jun 93 4
7 Jun 94 5
17 Jan 95 3 (Referral Rpt)
19 Oct 95 3
On 25 Sep 96, the applicant was released from active duty for
Completion of Required Active Service with an honorable
characterization of service in the grade of sergeant with an RE code
of 2X (First-term, second-term, or career airman considered but not
selected for reenlistment under the SRP). She was credited with 9
years, 5 months, and 3 days of active service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Chief, Skills Management Branch, AFPC/DPPAE, reviewed this
application and indicated that Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP)
consideration is normally documented on an AF Form 418.
Unfortunately, the AF Form 418 denying applicant reenlistment is not
on file in her military personnel record. However, based on her last
two EPR ratings of 3, nonselection for reenlistment appears
appropriate. Also, a 26 Aug 96 Records Review Listing confirms RE
code “2X” is correct. DPPAE recommends denial of applicant’s request.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on
14 Dec 98 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. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of probable error or injustice. After a thorough review
of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not
persuaded that her RE code should be changed to a favorable code. Her
contentions are duly noted; however, it appears that her conduct was
unacceptable due to financial irresponsibility as noted in her 17 Jan
95 EPR and apparently the decision was made to deny her reenlistment.
The fact is that every supervisor and commander is charged with making
difficult decisions regarding the retention of first-term, second-
term, or career airmen. Members separated from the Air Force are
furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and
the circumstances of their separation. Applicant’s RE code accurately
defines the circumstances of her separation and we note that her
service characterization was honorable. Therefore, we have no basis
on which to make any changes to the record; thus, we must deny the
request.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of probable 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 this application in
Executive Session on 9 September 1999, under the provisions of Air
Force Instruction 36-2603:
Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chair
Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member
Mr. John E. Pettit, Member
Mrs. Joyce Earley, Examiner (without vote)
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Oct 98, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 24 Nov 98.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 14 Dec 98.
DAVID C. VAN GASBECK
Panel Chair
Unfortunately, the AF Form 418 denying applicant reenlistment is not on file in his military personnel record. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 16 Oct 98, w/atchs; Letter, dated 2 Oct 98; Statement BARBARA A. WESTGATE Panel Chair AFBCMR 98-00035 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 116), it is directed...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-01074
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 15 Jun 98 for review and response. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that the RE code issued at the time of his discharge was either in error or unjust. While the AF Form 418, denying...
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 15 Jun 98 for review and response. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that the RE code issued at the time of his discharge was either in error or unjust. While the AF Form 418, denying...
On 1 Dec 97, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Completion of Required Active Service) with an honorable characterization of service in the grade of senior airman with an RE code of 2X (First-term, second-term, or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP). Unfortunately, the AF Form 418 denying applicant reenlistment is not on file in his military personnel record. Exhibit E. Letter fr applicant,...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02572 INDEX CODE: 100.03 HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2X be changed so that he may reenlist. The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE recommends the application be denied. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00055 INDEX CODE 100.06 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed so that he may reenlist in the Air Force. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant's military records, are contained in the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01955
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01955 INDEX CODE: 110.00, 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2X be changed to allow eligibility to reenlist in the Air Force. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends...
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 advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). Based on the above, we recommend denial of applicant’s request for correction of RE code.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03340
The applicant has not provided sufficient evidence that the commander’s decision to deny him reenlistment was inappropriate or not in compliance with Air Force policy. The complete 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 31 Jan 03 for review and comment within 30 days. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00568
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00568 INDEX NUMBER: 110.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Separation Code of “JBK,” discharged after completion of required service, be changed. Her “2X” Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code, “First-term, second-term, or career airman considered but not selected for...