RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02644
INDEX CODE: 110.00, 100.03
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of “2C” be changed to “3A” to
allow eligibility to enlist in the Air Force Reserves.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was not discharged for disciplinary reasons.
In support of his request, applicant submits a personal statement and
additional documents associated with the issues cited in his
contentions. These documents are appended at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant contracted his enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 11 Jan
90 for a period of 4 years.
On 12 Jun 90, the applicant was notified that he was being recommended
for discharge from the Air Force for failure to make satisfactory
progress in a required training program. In addition, he was advised
that if the recommendation was approved, the applicant’s discharge
would be described as an entry level separation and he would be
ineligible for reenlistment in the Air Force. The applicant waived
his right to submit a statement in his own behalf to the discharge
authority. The discharge authority approved the commander’s request
for an entry level separation. On 20 Jun 90, the applicant was
separated from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10 (Entry
Level Performance) and received an uncharacterized separation. He had
completed 5 months and 10 days and was serving in the grade of airman
basic (E-1) at the time of separation. He received an RE Code of 2C.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Separations Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, stated that the 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 his separation code. DPPRS recommended the applicant’s
records remain the same and his request be denied. A complete copy of
this evaluation is appended at Exhibit C.
The Special Programs and AFBCMR Manager, HQ AFPC/DPPAES, reviewed this
application and recommended denial. DPPAES stated that RE Code 2C is
defined as “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or
entry level separation without characterization of service.” Hence,
the applicant’s RE Code of 2C is correct (Exhibit D).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on
23 November 2000 for review and response. As of this date, no
response has been received by this office (Exhibit E).
_________________________________________________________________
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. While the RE code assigned
to the applicant, at the time, was technically correct and in
accordance with the governing regulation, we believe it would be an
injustice for the applicant to continue to suffer its effects in the
way of enlistment opportunities in the Armed Forces. We note that the
applicant was young and apparently immature and, after a review of the
records, we have uncovered no acts of misconduct. We noted the years
which have passed since the applicant was discharged and it appears,
through applicant’s submission, that he has overcome the difficulties
he encountered while in the training program. We note that the
applicant wishes to enlist in the Air Force Reserve and we believe
that he should be given the opportunity to apply for enlistment.
Therefore, we recommend that the RE code of “2C” be changed to “3A,” a
code which can be waived for prior service enlistment consideration.
In view of the foregoing, we recommend that his 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 Reenlistment
Eligibility (RE) code, issued in conjunction with his entry level
separation on 20 June 1990, was “3A.”
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in
Executive Session on 16 January 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Benedict A. Kausal IV, Panel Chair
Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Member
Mr. Richard M. McCormick, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 Oct 00, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 23 Oct 00.
Exhibit D. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAES, dated 27 Oct 00.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 10 Oct 00.
BENEDICT A. KAUSAL IV
Panel Chair
AFBCMR 00-02644
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 APPLICANT be corrected to show that his Reenlistment
Eligibility (RE) code, issued in conjunction with his entry level
separation on 20 June 1990, was “3A.”
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02965 INDEX CODE: 110.00, 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C be changed to allow eligibility to reenter the Air Force. He requests additional information be provided concerning his discharge. A complete copy of this response is appended...
The 1 May 00 second opinion from the psychologist was noted; however, a majority of the Board further concludes that the narrative reason for discharge is appropriate. _________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: A majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be denied. BENEDICT A. KAUSAL IV Chair AFBCMR 00-01513 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 00-00881 INDEX CODE: 128.05 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of JKM be changed to a code that would not require the recoupment of her Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...
A copy of the AFDRB Hearing Record is appended at Exhibit C. Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, WV, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Separations Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, stated that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation at the time of his discharge from...
Discharge action was initiated in the applicant’s case due to her failure to meet military obligations by not completing her dependent care certification. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS 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 the that the application will only be reconsidered...
Discharge action was initiated in the applicant’s case due to her failure to meet military obligations by not completing her dependent care certification. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS 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 the that the application will only be reconsidered...
On 16 Apr 98, he was honorably discharged in the grade of airman (E-2) under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (unsatisfactory performance), with a separation code of “JHJ”. A copy of the AFDRB Hearing Record is appended at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Education and Training Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPAT, stated that after reviewing the applicant’s request, reconsideration of his separation code should be approved. RICHARD A....
These documents are appended at Exhibit A. There is no indication in the applicant’s records that he was recommended for an AFAM for his tour in Korea, and he has not provided any documentation to substantiate his claim. While we note the Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM) citation provided in support of the applicant’s appeal, no documentary evidence has been presented substantiating to our satisfaction that the recommendation for the requested award was officially placed in military...
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.
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.