RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-00312
INDEX CODE: 112.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
An RE code of “2Y” is given to non-commissioned officers (NCOs) who have
received an Article 15, are reduced in rank, or to second term airmen who
are denied reenlistment. He states that he does not fit in the above
categories and he received an honorable discharge from the Air Force.
In support of his request, he submits a career counseling background
information sheet, and a letter from the New York Air National Guard.
Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 12 December 1986 in the
grade of airman basic for a period of 4 years.
On 9 March 1990, applicant signed an AF Form 418, Selective
Reenlistment/Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) Status Consideration, denying
him NCO status. He was not recommended for NCO status due to his lack of
self-confidence in his ability to perform his duties, not retaining newly
learned information well, and his lack of leadership and supervisory skill
commenserate to NCO status.
A resume of the applicant's performance reports since 1987 follows:
PERIOD ENDING OVERALL EVALUATION
17 Aug 87 7 Old System
14 Mar 88 8
14 Mar 89 8
14 Mar 90 2 New System
Applicant was honorably discharged on 11 July 1991, in the grade of senior
airman, in accordance with AFR 39-10 (Completion of Extended Enlistment).
He served a total of 4 years and 7 months to active duty.
Applicant received an RE code of “2Y.”
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Military Personnel Management Specialist, Separations Branch, HQ
AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed this application and states that this case has been
reviewed for separation processing and there are no errors or
irregularities causing an injustice to the applicant. The separation
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. The applicant did not identify any specific errors in
the separation processing nor provide facts warranting a change in his
reason for separation or for the separation code assigned in his case.
Accordingly, they recommend denial of applicant's request.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
The Chief, Skills Management, Directorate, Personnel Program Management, HQ
AFPC/DPPAE, also reviewed this application and states that they recommend
denial of applicant’s request. However if the decision is to grant the
relief sought, applicant’s record should be corrected to reflect his RE
code as “3K,” “Second-term or career airman, serving in the grade of senior
airman, who has not yet been appointed to NCO status.”
A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 28 April 2000, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the
applicant for review and response within 30 days. 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. We took notice of the
applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however,
we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force 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 the absence of
evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting
the relief sought in this application.
_________________________________________________________________
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 27 June 200, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. David W. Mulgrew, Panel Chair
Mr. Christopher Carey, Member
Ms. Kathy L. Boockholdt, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 3 February 2000, w/atchs
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 7 April 2000.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 12 April 2000.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 28 April 2000.
DAVID MULGREW
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02754
The following AF Forms 418, Selective Reenlistment/Noncommissioned Officer Status Consideration, were on file in the master personnel record. She received an RE code of 2Y “A second-term or career airman considered but not selected for NCO status, or had vacated NCO status under AFR 39-13.” The complete Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit D. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 7 Oct 05, copies of the Air Force...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-02724 INDEX CODE: 110 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be reinstated into the Regular Air Force. The applicant was discharged on 13 August 1998 under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Miscellaneous/General Reasons) with an Entry Level Separation and character of service...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-03253 INDEX CODE: 110.00; 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of “2C” be changed to a “1” and that his Entry Level Separation be changed to a hardship discharge. However, we find no basis upon which to recommend changing the reason for his discharge...
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01211
The initial DD Form 214 issued in conjunction with the applicant’s 15 Jul 91 separation reflected the narrative reason for separation as “Return from overseas within 30 days of expiration term of service,” with separation code “K14,” and RE Code 4D (Grade is senior airman and member has completed at least nine years of total active service and had not yet been selected for staff sergeant). At the time a member is separated from the Air Force, he/she is furnished an RE code predicated upon...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01749 INDEX CODE: 112.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His separation and reenlistment eligibility (RE) codes be changed. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01749
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01749 INDEX CODE: 112.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His separation and reenlistment eligibility (RE) codes be changed. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. The Special Programs & AFBCMR Manager, HQ AFPC/DPPAES, also evaluated the case and explains why they corrected the applicant’s RE code from “3A” to “2N.” However, if the relief sought is granted, then the author recommends the applicant’s RE code be changed to “3K” (“Reserved for use by HQ AFPC or the AFBCMR when no other RE code applies or is inappropriate [sic].” [The definition for “3K” provided by DPPAES is incorrect because that meaning...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2001-03652
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to the Board’s request for clarification regarding whether a change of the narrative reason for discharge currently listed as personality disorder is justified, the AFBCMR Medical Consultant provided the following advisory...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03679
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPAE recommends the application be denied. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). We note that, since the applicant was not in a required 5-skill level...