Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0101090
Original file (0101090.doc) Auto-classification: Denied



                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  01-01090
                 INDEX CODE:  100.00


                 COUNSEL:  NONE


                 HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He requested to be discharged after failing his  Career  Development
Course (CDC).  He was not discharged because of  the  failure.   Two
years later, he was informed the 3A031 CDC was being  rewritten  due
to mistakes with it.

Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 15 Jun 94, the  applicant  enlisted  in  the  Regular  Air  Force
(RegAF) for a period of four years in the grade of airman basic.

On 18 Oct 96, the applicant was notified by the commander  that  she
was recommending that he  be  discharged  from  the  Air  Force  for
Unsatisfactory  Performance -  Failure  to  Progress  In  On-the-Job
Training.  The reasons for this action were as follows:

            a.   On or about 19 Jul 96, he failed to pass his CDC.

            b.   On or about 28 Aug 96, he failed to  pass  his  CDC
for the second time.

On 24 Oct  96,  the  Staff  Judge  Advocate  (SJA)  found  that  the
applicant’s file was legally sufficient subject  to  proper  medical
clearance.  The applicant acknowledged that military  legal  counsel
had been made available  to  him  and  consulted  the  Area  Defense
Counsel.  He did not submit statements for consideration.  Based  on
applicant’s failure in his CDC’s and no record  of  misconduct,  the
SJA recommended that the applicant be separated from the  Air  Force
with an honorable discharge without probation and rehabilitation.

On 7 Nov 96, the applicant was discharged from the Air  Force  under
the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Unsatisfactory  Performance)  in  the
grade of airman first class with an honorable discharge  and  an  RE
code of 2C “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge;  or
entry level separation without characterization of service.”  He was
credited with 2 years, 4 months, and 23 days of active service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Assistant Noncommissioned Officer-in-Charge (NCOIC),  Separation
Procedures  Section  (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   at   that   time.
Additionally, the discharge was within the sound discretion  of  the
discharge authority.  The applicant did not submit any new  evidence
or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the  discharge
processing.  He provided no other facts warranting an upgrade of the
discharge.  DPPRS recommends his records remain  the  same  and  his
request be denied.

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

The Assistant Chief, Skills  Management  Branch  (AFPC/DPPAE),  also
reviewed this application and indicated that the RE code  of  2C  is
correct.

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to  applicant  on
29 Jun 01 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 his RE code should be changed.
 His contentions are duly noted;  however,  we  do  not  find  these
uncorroborated  assertions,  in  and  by  themselves,   sufficiently
persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force.   We
therefore agree with the recommendations of the Air Force and  adopt
the rationale expressed as the  basis  for  our  decision  that  the
applicant has failed to sustain his  burden  that  he  has  suffered
either an error or an injustice.  Therefore, we find  no  compelling
basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

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 2 August 2001,  under  the  provisions  of  Air
Force Instruction 36-2603:

                  Mr. Henry Romo, Jr., Panel Chair
                  Mr. Christopher Carey, Member
                  Mr. Clarence D. Long, III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 13 Apr 01, w/atch.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 11 Jun 01.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 18 Jun 01.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Jun 01.




                                   HENRY ROMO, JR.
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0101090

    Original file (0101090.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was not discharged because of the failure. Based on applicant’s failure in his CDC’s and no record of misconduct, the SJA recommended that the applicant be separated from the Air Force with an honorable discharge without probation and rehabilitation. We therefore agree with the recommendations of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden that he has suffered either an error or an injustice.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0003400

    Original file (0003400.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-03400 INDEX CODES: 100.06, 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for separation and reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief Medical Consultant, AFBCMR, reviewed this...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002965

    Original file (0002965.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0102238

    Original file (0102238.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPAE notes that since there is no RE code directly associated for pregnancy, the RE code “2I” is correct since that was the status of the applicant at the time of separation. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 12 Oct 01 for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0103562

    Original file (0103562.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The commander was recommending that applicant receive an honorable discharge. In an effort to study and pass the second final testing, he and his trainer reviewed the CDC course material. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and provided letters of recommendation, a letter from his congressman, an application for an Air Force Reserve position, and a letter from the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0102258

    Original file (0102258.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE stated that the applicant was released from active duty on 15 Oct 96 with an honorable characterization of service after serving 9 years and 2 months. However, if the Board wishes to grant the applicant relief they recommend changing his code to 3K “Reserved for use by HQ AFPC or the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) when no other reenlistment eligibility code applies or is appropriate.” A...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01768

    Original file (BC-2002-01768.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    At the time she was released, she took her end of course exams twice and failed both times due to working 12 hour days and suffering a miscarriage. 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 offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002079

    Original file (0002079.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02079 INDEX CODE: 100.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The separation code of JBK (Completion of Required Active Service) on her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty) be changed to LCC (Reduction in Force <Full Separation Pay>) to match the reason for separation...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00928

    Original file (BC-2003-00928.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The commander indicated in his recommendation for discharge action that before recommending the discharge, the applicant was given ample opportunity to study and prepare for his Career Development Course (CDC). _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 4 June 2003, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. ...

  • 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.