Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 0002050
Original file (0002050.doc) Auto-classification: Approved



                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  00-02050
            INDEX CODE:  100.03

            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED:  No


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be  changed  to  2Q  and  his
separation code be reviewed for accuracy.  He later  requested  only
that his RE code be changed to 2C rather than 2Q.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The 2P RE code represents  absent  without  leave  (AWOL);  deserter
dropped from rolls.  Considering the  fact  that  he  was  honorably
discharged, it was not possible to also be AWOL.

Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 26 Jun 81, the  applicant  enlisted  in  the  Regular  Air  Force
(RegAF) for a period of four years in the grade of airman basic.

On 27 Jul 81, a medical evaluation board convened at  Lackland  AFB,
Texas.   After  consideration  of   clinical   records,   laboratory
findings,  and  physical  examination,  the  board  established  the
following diagnosis:  pes  valgo  planus  with  incapacitating  foot
pain.  He did not meet  minimum  enlistment  standards  but  he  met
retention  standards.   The  board  recommended  the  applicant   be
discharged from the service by reason of physical  disability  which
existed  prior  to  service  (EPTS)  and  had  not  been  aggravated
permanently.

On 29 Jul 81, the applicant  was  notified  by  his  commander  that
involuntary discharge action had been recommended  against  him  for
his erroneous enlistment.  The commander advised the applicant  that
if his recommendation was  approved,  he  would  be  ineligible  for
reenlistment into  the  Air  Force  as  long  as  the  disqualifying
enlistment defect existed.

Applicant was advised he had a right to counsel  and  the  right  to
submit statements in his own behalf.  He elected to waive his  right
to counsel and did not submit a statement in his  own  behalf.   The
discharge  authority  reviewed  the  recommendation  for   erroneous
enlistment and approved the commander’s request.

On 31 Jul 81, the applicant was discharged under the  provisions  of
AFR 39-10 (Failed to Meet Physical Standards for Enlistment) with an
honorable characterization of service in the grade of  airman  basic
with an RE code  of  2P  (Separated  under  AFR  39-10  as  marginal
performer or to preserve good order and discipline,  Basic  Military
Trainee (BMT) eliminees  discharged  due  to  erroneous  enlistment,
concealment of civilian convictions, and so forth) and a  separation
code of JFU (Failed to Meet Physical Standards for Enlistment).   He
was credited with 1 month and 5 days of active service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Military Personnel Management Specialist,  AFPC/DPPRS,  reviewed
this application and indicated that, based upon the documentation in
the file, the discharge  was  consistent  with  the  procedural  and
substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  Additionally,
the discharge was within  the  sound  discretion  of  the  discharge
authority.  Applicant did not submit any new  evidence  or  identify
any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge  processing.
Additionally, he provided  no  facts  warranting  a  change  in  his
narrative reason for separation or a change in the  separation  code
he was given.  DPPRS recommends disapproval.

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

The Special Programs & AFBCMR Manager,  AFPC/DPPAES,  also  reviewed
this application and indicated that the RE code 2P (Separated  under
AFR 39-10 as marginal  performer  or  to  preserve  good  order  and
discipline, BMT eliminees discharged due  to  erroneous  enlistment,
concealment of civilian convictions, and so forth) is correct.

A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________






APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and indicated  that  he
feels the separation code issue has been resolved.  He  respectfully
requests that his RE code still be changed.  Initially he  requested
2Q (Personnel retired or discharged under AFR 35-4)  as  he  thought
that was the closest code to his situation but that is not the case.
 Since he was not medically retired or discharged, that one does not
apply.   The  code  that  reflects  more  accurately  his  discharge
circumstances based  on  the  current  codes  in  use  would  be  2C
(Separated under AFM 39-12).

Applicant’s complete response,  with  attachments,  is  attached  at
Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  After  reviewing  the
evidence of record, we agree that applicant’s  separation  from  the
Air  Force  was  appropriate.   However,  in  view  of  the  current
reenlistment eligibility code listing, we believe a  change  of  the
applicant’s RE code to 2C more accurately reflects the circumstances
of  his  administrative  separation  with  an  honorable  discharge.
Therefore, we recommend that the records be corrected  as  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 his RE code, issued
in conjunction with his honorable discharge on 31 Jul 81, was RE 2C.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 9 November 2000, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

                  Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
                  Mr. George Franklin, Member
              Mr. Jackson A. Hauslein, Member

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

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 25 Jul 00, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 23 Aug 00.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAES, dated 1 Sep 00.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 15 Sep 00.
     Exhibit F.  Letter fr applicant, dated 12 Sep 00, w/atchs.



                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair

AFBCMR 00-02050




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 that:

      The pertinent military records of the Department  of  the  Air
Force relating to , be  corrected  to  show  that  his  reenlistment
eligibility (RE) code, issued  in  conjunction  with  his  honorable
discharge on 31 July 1981, was RE 2C.







                                                           JOE    G.
LINEBERGER
                                                         Director
                                                          Air  Force
Review Boards Agency

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00505

    Original file (BC-2003-00505.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 19 Oct 81, the discharge authority directed applicant be discharged with an honorable discharge. Although the applicant has requested that his separation code be changed to medical reasons or in the best interest of the Air Force, we found no evidence that his physical fitness to perform his duties at the time of his separation was questionable. We note that the BCMR Medical Consultant indicated that the evidence of record supports a change to the applicant’s separation document...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03244

    Original file (BC-2006-03244.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge authority approved the recommended separation and the applicant was honorably discharged on 21 Jul 80. The complete DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force Evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days on 1 Dec 06. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03038

    Original file (BC-2003-03038.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03038 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed. When the applicant was discharged he received an RE code of “2P” which at that time indicated the applicant was a marginal performer. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03728

    Original file (BC 2013 03728.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, RE code 2P did not have the meaning of AWOL at the time of his discharge. The applicant’s RE code is the correct RE code per the applicable guidance at that time. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility, and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00499

    Original file (BC 2014 00499.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 10 Jul 79, the Internal Medicine Clinic recommended the applicant be discharged for a medical condition that existed prior to entry into the service. In his request the applicant acknowledged that a medical board had determined that at the time of entry into military service he did not meet the minimum medical standards for enlistment into the Air Force. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9901087

    Original file (9901087.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-01087 INDEX CODE: 112.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed from 2P to a favorable code. Therefore, recommend his record be corrected accordingly. Exhibit B.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0101881

    Original file (0101881.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE states that they find no documentation to support the Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2P, “Absent without leave (AWOL); deserter or dropped from rolls (DFR).” However, based on documentation and member’s narrative reason for separation “marginal performer” they recommend the applicant’s code be changed to 2C “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service” which they feel...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00339

    Original file (BC-2003-00339.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Under current provisions, AFI-36-2606, Reenlistment in the Air Force, a “2P” RE code is used to identify personnel “absent without leave; deserter or dropped from rolls.” However, there is no need to change her RE Code, because it was properly assessed under current provisions at the time. We note that the applicant was discharged from the Air Force for “marginal performance.” The applicant has not provided sufficient evidence that she should have received an RE code that would allow her...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02299

    Original file (BC-2002-02299.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02299 INDEX CODE: 112.10 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code 2P (AWOL, deserter dropped from rolls) be changed to enable him to enlist in the Air Force Reserve; his DD Form 214, Report of Separation From Active Duty, be corrected to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00430

    Original file (BC 2014 00430.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 18 Dec 77, he was notified by his commander that he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force under the provisions of AFI 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airman. However, his RE code of “2P” is the correct RE code per the applicable guidance at the time (AFR 35-16, Volume I, 14 Nov 77). The complete DPSOA evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 8 May 14, a...