RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00693
INDEX CODE: 112.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be upgraded.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The reasons the applicant believes the records to be in error or
unjust and the evidence submitted in support of the appeal are at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the
applicant's military records, are contained in the letter prepared by
the appropriate office of the Air Force.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS states that they believe the discharge was consistent with
the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge
regulation. Additionally, the discharge was within the sould
discretion of the discharge authority. Therefore, they recommend
denial of applicant’s request.
The applicant, while serving in the grade of sergeant, was discharged
from the Air Force on 10 February 1989 under the provisions of AFR 39-
10 (misconduct-drug abuse) with an honorable conditions discharge. He
served 18 years, 2 months and 3 days total active service.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPPAE states that the Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2H,
“Participating in Track 4 or 5 of the Substance Abuse Reorientation
and Treatment (SART) Program for alcohol, or has failed to complete
Track 4” is correct.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 9 July 2002, a complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was
forwarded to the applicant for review and response 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. 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 Staff
and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no
compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this
application.
_________________________________________________________________
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 this application on 27
August 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Peggy E. Gordon, Panel Chair
Mr. James W. Russell, III, Member
Mr. Albert J. Starnes, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 7 Feb 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 24 Jun 02
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 19 Jun 02.
Exhibit E. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 9 Jul02.
PEGGY E. GORDON
Panel Chair
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 | CY2002 | BC-2002-01490
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01490 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: DAV HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for discharge and reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C be changed to allow eligibility to enlist in the Air National Guard. The applicant’s request for a conditional waiver of an administrative discharge board...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01490 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: DAV HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for discharge and reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C be changed to allow eligibility to enlist in the Air National Guard. The applicant’s request for a conditional waiver of an administrative discharge board...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00578 INDEX CODE: 110.00 APPLICANT COUNSEL: None SSN HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her entry-level separation be upgraded to an honorable discharge and her reenlistment (RE) code changed to allow her the opportunity to reenter the Air Force. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-03613 INDEX CODE: 110.00 APPLICANT COUNSEL: None SSN HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed to allow him to reenlist in the Air Force. A complete copy of the Medical Consultant’s evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPRS states Air Force policy is that...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02227 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS states that they believe the discharge was consistent with theprocedural and substantive...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01106
Since this condition is unsuiting for military service, the applicant underwent entry level separation. The BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that even though the applicant was on active duty after 180 days of continuous active service, the process of his discharge began before that point in time. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00972
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00972 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be upgraded to allow his enlistment in the Armed Forces. In support of the appeal, the applicant submits letters of recommendation. The AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit...
Applicant's request for upgrade of his discharge to honorable was denied by the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) on 20 Aug 91. He provided no other facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge. Exhibit C. AFDRB Hearing Record, dated 20 Aug 91.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02385
The applicant submitted a request to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to have his under honorable conditions (general) discharge upgraded to honorable. The applicant submitted a request to the Air Force Personnel Board (AFPB) to change his reenlistment code. Based on the information and evidence provided they recommend the applicant's request be denied (Exhibit D).