RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02664
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code be upgraded to allow him the
opportunity to reenlist into the military.
_________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The disciplinary actions taken against him for an incident that occurred on
13 December 1998 were extreme.
The applicant states that the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) has
upgraded his discharge; however, they were unable to upgrade his RE Code.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant reenlisted in the Regular Air Force on 1 October 1998 for a
period of six years. His Total Active Federal Military Service Date
(TAFMSD) is 28 September 1995.
On 5 April 1999, the Office of Special Investigation (OSI) completed an
investigation into the applicant’s alleged aggravated assault of a civilian
during which he allegedly shot the civilian.
On 26 April 1999, he was charged with two specifications of carrying a
concealed weapon and one specification of making a false official
statement, in violation of Articles 134 and 107 of the Uniform Code of
Military Justice (UCMJ). Specifically, that he unlawfully carried a
concealed weapon (i.e., 9mm handgun) on 13 December 1999; that he
unlawfully carried a concealed weapon (i.e., 38 caliber pistol and a speed
loader with five rounds) on 6 January 1999; and that on 6 January 1999,
with intent to deceive, he made a false official statement to an OSI agent
by denying that he had purchased or owned a 9mm semi-automatic handgun, or
that he had shot anyone.
He requested discharge in lieu of court-martial on 4 May 1999 and
acknowledged that if his request was approved, his service would be
characterized as Under Other than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC).
The discharge authority approved his request for discharge on 14 May 1999.
He was discharged on 8 June 1999 under the provisions of AFI 36-3208
(Discharge in Lieu of Court Martial), with service characterized as UOTHC,
and was issued an RE Code of 2B (Separated with General or UOTHC
discharge). He completed 3 years, 8 months, and 10 days of active service.
On 1 February 2002, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered
the applicant’s requests that his discharge be upgraded to honorable, the
reason and authority for his discharge be changed, and his RE Code be
changed. The AFDRB found no impropriety to warrant upgrading his discharge
to honorable; however, they found that his character of service was more
appropriately described as general. The AFDRB denied the remainder of his
requests.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPAE has reviewed the applicant’s case file and states, in part, that
the RE Code of 2B is correct.
The AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant reviewed the evaluation and provides a copy of his present
employment job description and extracts from his records.
The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or
regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of error or injustice to warrant upgrading his RE Code. In this
respect, we note that the applicant’s discharge appears to be in compliance
with the governing Air Force Instruction in effect at the time of his
separation and that he was afforded all the rights to which entitled. We
note that the Air Force Discharge Review Board has upgraded to the
characterization of the applicant’s service to general (under honorable
conditions). However, he provides no evidence that his separation was
inappropriate or that the assigned RE Code reflecting his involuntary
separation was in error or unjust. There being insufficient evidence to
the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief
sought.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown
that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to
our understanding of the issue(s) involved. Therefore, the request for a
hearing is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate
the existence of 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 Docket Number 01-02664 in
Executive Session on 15 August 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Vice Chair
Mr. Billy C. Baxter, Member
Mr. Philip Sheuerman, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 22 Aug 01, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 28 May 02.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Jun 02.
Exhibit E. Applicant’s Response, w/atchs.
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Vice Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02370
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02370 INDEX CODE: 110.02 xxxxxxxxxxx COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code of “2B” (Separated with a general or under-other-than-honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge) and Separation Code of “JFF” (Secretarial Authority) be changed. On 10 August 1999,...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02224
After hearing the facts and circumstances of the investigations, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) upgraded his discharge from under other than honorable conditions to honorable. 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 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01753
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01753 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected by changing the description of his misconduct from “a user or abuser of illegal drugs” to “a conspirator in the purchase/sale/use of an illegal drug.” His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “2B” be...
In his 13 years of service, he never received an Article 15 or any such reprimands. The application was timely filed. Exhibit C. AFDRB Hearing Record, dated 3 Apr 01, w/atch.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02214
On 22 May 2003, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied his request that his discharge be upgraded to honorable and his RE Code and reason and authority for discharge be changed. The AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: He will always have a mark against him as long as his records remain unchanged. Exhibit B.
With respect to the RE code of 2B that he received, we note that the Secretary of the Air Force has statutory authority to promulgate rules and regulations governing the administration of the Air Force. We conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances. While it appears that he has made a good start toward becoming a productive member of society, we also find insufficient evidence...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02302
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02302 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The characterization of his discharge be upgraded from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable and the narrative reason for separation and reentry (RE) code be changed to allow him to serve his country once again. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01604
On 23 Dec 92, the applicant was discharged in the grade of airman first class with a general characterization for misconduct after 3 years, 2 months and 20 days of active duty. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, a majority of the Board is not persuaded his 1992 general discharge should be upgraded to honorable. LAURENCE M. GRONER Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2004-01604 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02057
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Because the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) upgraded his discharge from “Under Honorable Conditions (General)” to “Honorable,” his reentry code and narrative reason for separation should be changed to allow him to re-enter active military service. The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE reviewed the applicant’s case and concludes that the RE code of 2C is correct. The DPPAE...
AF | DRB | CY2004 | FD2004-00051
CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. Svd: 2 Yrs 2 Mo 7 Das, of which AMS is 2 yrs 0 months 10 days (excludes 1 month 27 days lost time). Specification 1: Did, at or near Anderson AFB, Guam, on or about 4 Apr 98, unlawfully strike -in his hand.