Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200444
Original file (0200444.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-00444
            INDEX CODE 100.06
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed to  allow  her  enlistment
in the Armed Forces.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Prior  to  her  discharge,  she  was  not  performing  well  on  her  Career
Development Course (CDC) due to the  birth  of  her  child  while  a  single
parent, and given her immaturity at the time, she requested separation.

The applicant states that she is now ready, prepared, and stable  enough  to
adjust to military life.

The applicant’s complete response, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 16  January  1997  for  a
period of four years, at the age of 19.

The applicant was notified by her commander on 7 August 1998, of his  intent
to  recommend  her   for   administrative   discharge   for   unsatisfactory
performance  -  failure  to   progress   in   on-the-job   training   (OJT).
Specifically, for her second failure to achieve a minimum passing  score  of
65 percent on her CDC  end  of  course  test.   The  applicant  acknowledged
receipt of the discharge  notification  and  waived  her  right  to  consult
counsel.

The  applicant  was  honorably  discharged  on  18  August  1998  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Unsatisfactory Performance) and was issued an  RE
code of 4I (Serving on Control Roster).

_________________________________________________________________



AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied and states,  in  part,  that
based on the documentation in the file, the discharge  was  consistent  with
the procedural and substantive requirements  of  the  discharge  regulation.
Although the applicant states that she  requested  discharge,  there  is  no
letter  from  the  applicant  requesting  a  discharge.   Additionally,  the
discharge was within the sound discretion of  the  discharge  authority  and
the applicant did not submit any new evidence  or  identify  any  errors  or
injustices that occurred in  the  discharge  processing.   She  provided  no
facts warranting an upgrade of her discharge.

The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAE states that the applicant was separated after serving 1 year  and
7 months of active service and that the  RE  code  of  4I  (Serving  on  the
Control Roster) is correct.

The AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the  applicant  on  26
April 2002 for review and comment 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 error or injustice to warrant upgrading her RE  Code.  In  this
respect, we note that the applicant’s discharge appears to be in  compliance
with the governing Air Force  Regulation  in  effect  at  the  time  of  her
separation  and  she  was  afforded  all  the  rights  to  which   entitled.
Furthermore,  she   provides   no   evidence   that   her   separation   was
inappropriate.  There being insufficient evidence to the contrary,  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 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  02-00444  in
Executive Session on 30 May 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Frederick R. Beaman, III, Member
                 Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, undated, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 25 Feb 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 8 Apr 02.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Apr 02.




                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01150

    Original file (BC-2006-01150.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01150 INDEX CODE: 100.00, 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 19 OCTOBER 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2001-02803

    Original file (BC-2001-02803.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02803 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reenlistment code (RE) be changed so she may enlist and her rank on her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be changed to reflect SrA (E-4) or at the minimum, A1C (E-3). The DPPAE evaluation is at...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02308

    Original file (BC-2004-02308.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 7 Jun 94, she elected to accept separation from the Air Force in lieu of a waiver of discharge processing. They recommended against changing the RE code as there is no error in the applicant’s records. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. HQ AFPC/DPPAT advises that DOD records indicate the applicant accepted MGIB enrollment on 12 Mar 93.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200973

    Original file (0200973.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00973 INDEX CODE: 110.00 APPICANT COUNSEL: None SSN HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to allow him to enlist in the Army. h. On 4 Jan 96, the applicant failed to complete Volume IV of his CDC's on time and received a letter of reprimand on 7 Feb 96. i. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01309

    Original file (BC-2005-01309.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    In support of her request, applicant provided DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States. She was separated from the Air Force on 11 February 2005, with an honorable service characterization and received a RE code of 2C ”Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service.” She served two years, four months and four days on active duty. Therefore, the Board majority...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201047

    Original file (0201047.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE states the RE code the applicant received is the appropriate code for those members separated "involuntarily with an honorable discharge or an entry level separation without characterization of service (Exhibit D). _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 24 May 2002, for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03000

    Original file (BC-2002-03000.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    She served 2 years, 2 months and 13 days of active service. The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE stated that the Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2C, “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service” is correct. However, after reviewing the applicant’s records, the Board believes the narrative reason for separation and her current RE code are somewhat harsh.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201247

    Original file (0201247.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, reflects that he was honorably discharged on 12 April 2000, under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, by reason of unsatisfactory performance, and was issued an RE Code of 2C. However, his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, reflects that he was honorably discharged on 12 April 2000, under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, by reason of unsatisfactory performance. ...

  • 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 | CY1999 | 9802602

    Original file (9802602.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    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....