RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00965
INDEX CODE: 128.05
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her Selected Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) payment be adjusted to six
years.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
There was gross negligence in her counseling process.
In support of the appeal, applicant submits a personal statement, a
copy of her enlistment papers and a copy of the Implementation
Instructions for Full Enlistment Program message.
Applicant's complete submission is attached 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. Accordingly, there is no
need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPAE reviewed the application and recommends the request be
disapproved.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 14 June 2002, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to
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 timely filed.
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 Force
and adopt their rationale as the basis for the 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 in
Executive Session on 23 July 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Panel Chair
Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member
Mr. Albert J. Starnes, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Mar 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 10 Jun 02.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 14 Jun 02.
PATRICIA D. VESTAL
Panel Chair
At the time the applicant requested information about reenlisting, current policy stated that a member could only reenlist 90 days prior to their expiration of term of service (ETS). 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 their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00876 INDEX CODE: 128.05 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He receive the difference between the 2.5 multiple Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) for the 1A4X1 AFSC and a 3.0 SRB for the 1A4X1D. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we...
The RE code which was issued at the time of applicant’s separation accurately reflects the circumstances of her separation and we do not find this code to be in error or unjust. In view of the foregoing, we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected by deleting the words “and conduct” from her narrative reason for separation. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air...
He received an uncharacterized entry level separation on 21 Aug 01 under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (fraudulent entry into military service). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits C and D. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS stated that, on 15 Aug 01, the...
The doctor told him the only way to get out of the Air Force was to say that he was a homosexual and he would be out in two days. On 25 July 1995, the commander notified the applicant that he was being discharged from the Air Force with an entry-level separation. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE states that the reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C, Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00959
The person told him that he would be able to reenlist as his discharge was a General discharge. On 26 June 2002, applicant was notified that he was being discharged under the auspices of Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-3208, for unsatisfactory duty performance and minor disciplinary infractions. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we are not persuaded that his uncorroborated assertions of an increase in maturity, in and of itself, sufficiently...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04089
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-04089 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 4D (senior airman or sergeant with at least nine years total active military service but fewer than sixteen years) be changed to enable her to reenter the...
The remaining 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 at Exhibits C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPP recommends the application be denied. DPPP stated that the fact the applicant met a faculty board is not the failure of an intended personnel action. The HQ AFPC/DPPP evaluation is at...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFBCMR Medical Consultant states that the applicant’s service medical record, which appears to be complete since it includes a report of his induction physical, contains no references to any hospitalization in Florida. There is no evidence in the service medical record to support the applicant’s request. Pre-existing medical conditions incurred prior to a member’s entrance on active duty are not ratable...
___________________________________________________________________ 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 at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPTR reviewed this application and recommended denial. In Jul 01, former spouse coverage was established...