RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01902
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His separation code of KBK and reenlistment (RE) code of 2x be changed
in order to allow him to be eligible to reenlist in the Air Force
Reserve.
_________________________________________________________________
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 applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic on
4 October 1993 for a term of 4 years. The applicant was separated for
completion of required active service with a separation code of KBK
and a RE code of 2X on 3 October 1997 in the grade of airman. He
served 4 years of total active service.
On 9 December 1995, the applicant was notified of his commander’s
intent to impose nonjudicial punishment upon him for the following
offense: for treating, with disrespectful language, a superior
noncommissioned officer. He was reduced to airman, forfeiture of $223
and 10 days extra duty with suspension of punishment until 17 June
1996. However, in March 1996 the nonjudicial punishment was remitted
because on or about 12 February 1996 he failed to obey a
direct order to pay the balance on his government American Express
Travel card. He was reduced to airman, ordered to pay $223 and
received 10 extra days of duty.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial. The applicant did not submit any new
evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the
discharge processing. Additionally, the applicant provided no facts
warranting a change in his narrative reason for separation. He has not
filed a timely request.
AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPPAE recommended denial. The applicant was discharged upon
completion of required active service with an honorable discharge and
an RE code of 2X, because he was not selected for reenlistment under
the SRP.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to
applicant on 2 August 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 an error or injustice. After a thorough review of
the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not
persuaded that his discharge separation and reenlistment code should
be changed. Applicant’s 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. Other than his own statement, applicant provides no persuasive
evidence that he was unfairly or incorrectly discharged. 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 Docket Number 02-01902
on 16 October 2002 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Albert F. Lowas, Jr., Panel Chairman
Mr. William H. Anderson, Member
Mr. Thomas J. Topolski, Jr., Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 31 Oct 01, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 2 Jul 02.
Exhibit D. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE dated 30 Jul 02
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR dated 2 Aug 02.
ALBERT F. LOWAS, JR
Panel Chairman
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2001-03419
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-03419 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The separation code of KBK on his DD Form 214 and reflected in the personnel system be changed to MBK _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: After his separation from active duty on 28 January 2001, he...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02326
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02326 INDEX CODE: 100.03, 100.06 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to allow enlistment in the Air Force Reserves. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She completed her active duty service...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-00224
Additionally, he provided character statements, but no facts warranting an upgrade of his discharge. On 31 October 2002, the Board staff requested the applicant provide post- service documentation within fourteen (14) days. Exhibit B.
The applicant could have reenlisted some time while she was on leave, and she apparently returned from leave in time to have reenlisted and qualified for an SRB. 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 not sustained her burden of having suffered either an error or an injustice. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant...
He received an LOR on 7 Apr 82 for failing to report for duty on 3 April 82. On 17 May 83, after consulting with counsel, the applicant requested discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his UOTHC discharge should be upgraded to honorable or general.
After careful consideration of applicant's requests and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02030
On 25 March 2002, the applicant's commander notified him that he was being discharged for mental disorders, specifically a personality disorder. The Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE indicates that based on the review of his case file, his RE code 2C, “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service” is correct. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the...
--He received a letter of counseling on 10 Jan 77 for not reporting for duty. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his UOTHC discharge should be upgraded to honorable or general. We note the applicant received three Article 15s, several LORs and counseling sessions, and substance abuse rehabilitation to no avail.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01637
They conducted a review of the personnel record and found nothing to support the change requested. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 24 Jun 05 for review and comment within 30 days. ___________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00236 INDEX CODE: 112.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS states that they believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural and...