RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC 2002-03008
INDEX CODE: 110.02
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
XXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His separation program designator (SPD) code be changed from LCC (released
from active duty) to JCC (discharge) and his reenlistment eligibility (RE)
code of 4D be changed on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or
Discharge From Active Duty.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His Air Reserve Station (ARS) Military Personnel Flight (MPF) advised him
that his DD Form 214 reflected the wrong SPD code, which may have resulted
in an incorrect reentry (RE) code. He also should have received an
honorable discharge certificate along with his DD Form 214 because he was
not entering into the active reserve nor did he have a commitment to the
inactive reserves at the time of his separation.
In support of his application, the applicant provides a copy of his DD Form
214. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit
A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant’s complete military personnel records were unavailable. The
following information was extracted from the available records. The
applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force effective 14 March 1986 at the
age of 21. He was progressively promoted to the grade of senior airman (E-
4), effective and with a date of rank of 14 March 1989 and was subsequently
appointed a sergeant. It appears that his appointment as a noncommissioned
officer was subsequently vacated. He served in support of Operation Desert
Storm/Shield from 2 August 1990 to 25 March 1996. During his active duty
service, the applicant was awarded the Air Force Achievement Medal with one
device, Humanitarian Service Medal with one device, Small Arms Expert
Marksmanship Ribbon/Rifle, NCO Professional Military Education Ribbon with
one device, Air Force Outstanding Unit Award, and the Air Force Good
Conduct Medal with 2 devices.
During his active duty tour, the applicant received twelve Enlisted
Performance Reports. The following is a resume of the applicant’s EPR
profile:
PERIOD ENDING PROMOTION RECOMMENDATION
13 Mar 87 9
3 Oct 87 9
3 Oct 88 9
31 Mar 90* 3
31 Oct 90* 2
24 Jan 91* 2
24 Jan 92 4
2 Jul 92 4
2 Jul 93 5
2 Jul 94 5
2 Jul 95 3
* Denotes referral EPR
On 25 March 1996, the applicant was honorably released from active duty due
to Reduction in Force (RIF) with a separation code of LCC (released from
active duty) and a reentry code of 4D (grade is senior airman or sergeant,
completed at least nine years of TAFMS, but fewer than sixteen years of
TAFMS, and has not been selected for promotion to staff sergeant. He had
served ten years and twelve days on active duty. He received separation
pay in the amount of $16,250.40.
On 2 September 1998, the applicant enlisted into the Air Force Reserve for
a period of six years. He was progressively promoted to the grade of
technical sergeant effective and with a date of rank of 1 March 2002. He
received the Air Force Reserve Medal with “M” device for his support of
Operation Enduring Freedom for the period 4 November 2001 to 3 November
2002.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial. The applicant was separated in accordance
with AFI 36-3208, reduction in force. According to the applicant’s DD Form
214, he received $16,250.40 in separation pay (full). In order for a
member to receive separation pay, he must sign a Ready Reserve Agreement
that releases him into the Ready Reserve. In accordance with AFI 36-3208,
paragraph 9.1.8, “The member must agree in writing to serve in the Ready
Reserve for at least three years following the separation from active duty.
A member who is qualified for separation pay, but is unqualified for the
Ready Reserve still must agree in writing to serve in the Ready Reserve in
order to receive separation pay.” This is also in accordance with Title 10
United States Code, Section 8013 and Executive Order 9397.
DPPRS feels the applicant’s discharge was consistent with the procedural
and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. Additionally,
the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority. As a
condition to receiving separation pay, the applicant was required to sign
the Ready Reserve Agreement, which constitutes a release from active duty.
Therefore, DPPRS feels no change in his SPD code is warranted. When a
member is released, he does not receive an Honorable Discharge certificate.
The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPPAE addressed the applicant’s RE code. The applicant was separated
on 25 March 1996 at the grade of Senior Airman (E-4) with an honorable
characterization of service after serving ten years and twelve days of
active duty. The applicant did not obtain the rank of Staff Sergeant (E-5)
prior to completing nine years of total active federal military service
(TAFMS). In accordance with AFI 36-2606, Reenlistments in the US Air
Force, individuals who have completed at least nine years TAFMS but fewer
than sixteen years TAFMS, and has not been selected for promotion to Staff
Sergeant will receive a RE code of 4D. DPPAE states that based on the
applicant’s records, the RE code 4D is correct. The DPPAE evaluation is at
Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant feels he was forced out of the Air Force by Force Reduction
and would have waived the severance pay to take a different separation code
and reentry code had he known he would have difficulty returning to active
duty. He left active duty in 1996 and entered the Air Force Reserve in
1998 as a Security Specialist for the Nebraska Air National Guard. He has
served in the security forces career field for over thirteen years and has
completed additional supervisory and leadership courses since he left
active duty. The security forces career field is currently undermanned and
he would be willing to stay until his high year of tenure. The applicant’s
rebuttal is at Exhibit F.
_________________________________________________________________
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 probable error or injustice. Evidence has not been presented
to show that the reason for the applicant’s separation and his separation
code are in error or unjust. The available record reveals that he was
released from active duty, rather than discharged, based on his acceptance
of separation pay. It appears that now, some seven years after his
separation, he believes he has been disadvantaged by the type of separation
he received. However, other than his assertions, the applicant has
provided no evidence to show that the actions taken by Air Force
authorities in 1996 were in error or unjust, that he was miscounseled, or
that he was treated differently than other similarly situated enlisted
members. Therefore, we find no basis on which to favorably consider his
request for a change to the reason for his separation and the corresponding
separation code.
4. As to the applicant’s request that his RE code be changed, as noted by
the Air Force office of primary responsibility, the code accurately
reflects his status at the time of his separation and we have seen no
evidence by the applicant which would lead us to believe that his RE code
is in error or unjust. We note that although the applicant’s RE code bars
immediate reentry, it may be waived to allow enlistment. There is no
guarantee that enlistment with such a code would be authorized. The
determination as to whether the code would be waived is based on the needs
of the service to which application for enlistment is made.
5. Finally, the applicant has requested he be given an honorable discharge
certificate. However, based on the fact that the applicant was released
from active duty in 1996 and the requested certificate may be issued only
at the time of discharge, and because the applicant entered active Reserve
status prior to the completion of his three-year Ready Reserve commitment,
he was never discharged. Hence, it would appear the issuance of an
Honorable Discharge certificate is not appropriate at this time.
_________________________________________________________________
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 16 April 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Roscoe Hinton Jr., Panel Chair
Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Member
Mr. Steven A. Shaw, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR
Docket No. BC 2002-03008:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Sep 02, with attachments.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 11 Oct 02.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 27 Dec 02.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Jan 03.
Exhibit F. Applicant’s Rebuttal, dated 2 Dec 02.
ROSCOE HINTON JR.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03008
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC 2002-03008 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His separation program designator (SPD) code be changed from LCC (released from active duty) to JCC (discharge) and his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 4D be changed on his DD Form 214,...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02844
The applicant has provided no evidence of a clear error or injustice related to the nonjudicial punishment 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 reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-03381 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, DD Form 214, be corrected as follows: Block 6 should read 5 August 1999 and Block 26 should read LCC. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03832
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03832 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The reenlistment eligibility (RE) code reflected on his DD Form 214 be changed to allow him to return to active duty. DPPAES further states the reenlistment eligibility code "4D" is the applicable code for a member whose grade is...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01479
He did not serve 12 years of active duty without being promoted and should not have been forced to separate. The Board notes the applicant’s RE code is incorrect and will be administratively corrected to reflect a code of 4D “Grade is senior airman or sergeant, completed at least nine years TAFMS, but fewer than 16 years TAFMS, and has not been selected for promotion to staff sergeant.” After careful consideration of the available evidence, the Board found no indication that the actions...
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: By Article 15 action on 26 November 1997, the applicant was given a suspended reduction from staff sergeant to senior airman for committing adultery between, on or about 27 October 1996 and 5 January 1997. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Military Personnel Management Specialist, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, advised that applicant’s commander denied his request...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02151
c. Block 27 - Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed from a “4D” to “1A.” EXAMINER’S NOTE: The applicant’s record has been administratively corrected to add an Air Force Achievement Medal and the Jumpmaster Course. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS states AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment in the United States Air Force, airmen in the grade of SrA and Sgt may not reenlist if the new date of separation (DOS) will exceed the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03789
As such, he was given an RE code of 4D. (Exhibit C) _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 21 March 2003 for review and response within 30 days. The applicant’s assigned RE code of 4D accurately reflects that at the time of his separation he was serving in the grade of senior airman, he had at least nine years of active military service, and...
After the first Article 15 was imposed, the commander initiated separation proceedings. The finding of the discharge board is not evidence in and of itself. A complete copy of this evaluation is appended at Exhibit C. The Enlisted Promotion and Military Testing Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, stated that the first time the EPR closing 19 April 1996 would have been considered in the promotion process was cycle 96E6 to technical sergeant (E-6) (promotions effective August 1996 - July 1997).
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1997-03305
After the first Article 15 was imposed, the commander initiated separation proceedings. The finding of the discharge board is not evidence in and of itself. A complete copy of this evaluation is appended at Exhibit C. The Enlisted Promotion and Military Testing Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, stated that the first time the EPR closing 19 April 1996 would have been considered in the promotion process was cycle 96E6 to technical sergeant (E-6) (promotions effective August 1996 - July 1997).