RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-04109
INDEX CODE: 112.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be upgraded to 1A.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The Air Force is a great stepping stone for anyone who is headed in
the right direction.
He would like to finish his enlistment, fight for his country and
serve in the greatest airpower in the world. He would like to be
forgiven for his mistakes and have another opportunity to complete his
enlistment.
In support of the appeal, applicant submits a personal statement.
Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 28 December 2000.
On 22 March 2001, the commander notified the applicant that he was
being recommended for an entry-level separation because he failed to
make satisfactory progress in a required training program.
Specifically, he was eliminated from the Security Forces training
course for academic deficiency after failing his written test twice
with scores of 34% and 36%--minimum passing is 70%. Prior to
disenrollment, the commander indicated he was counseled concerning his
performance and received individual assistance with negative results.
The applicant, while serving in the grade of airman basic, was
separated from the Air Force on 30 March 2001 under the provisions of
AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen (Entry-Level
Performance and Conduct), and received an uncharacterized entry-level
separation. He served 3 months and 3 days on active duty. He was
assigned a Reenlistment Eligibility code of 2C.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPAE states that the Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2C,
“Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge, or entry level
separation without characterization of service” is correct.
A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
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 discretion of
the discharge authority. Airmen are given entry-level
separation/uncharacterized service characterization when separation is
initiated in the first 180 days of continuous active service. The
Department of Defense (DOD) determined if a member served less than
180 days continuous active service, it would be unfair to the member
and the service to characterize their limited service. Therefore, his
uncharacterized character of service is correct and in accordance with
Department of Defense and Air Force instructions. An entry-
level/uncharacterized separation should not be viewed as negative and
should not be confused with other types of separation.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 7 March 2003, copies of the Air Force evaluations were 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 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 29 April 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Member
Mr. James W. Russell, III, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Jan 03, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 26 Feb 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 21 Feb 03.
Exhibit E. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 7 Mar 03.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01037
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial and stated that airmen are given entry- level separation/uncharacterized service characterization when separation is initiated in the first 180 days of continuous active service. After careful consideration of the circumstances of this case and the evidence provided by the applicant, we are not persuaded that the applicant's discharge and the reenlistment code he received...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04021
On 20 Nov 91, the discharge authority approved the recommended separation and directed that the applicant be issued an entry level separation. The applicant did not provide any evidence showing the information in the discharge case file was erroneous, his substantial rights were violated, or that his commanders abused their discretionary authority. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03241
On 29 Aug 00, the applicant received notification that she was being recommended for discharge for erroneous enlistment. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicant’s submission, we are unpersuaded that the requested relief should be approved.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00866
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00866 INDEX CODE: 100.03, 100.06 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00038
Enlistment medical standards specify that “Recurrent headaches of all types of sufficient severity or frequency as to interfere with normal function or a history of such headaches within 3 years” are disqualifying for enlistment. There is insufficient information in the available records to draw a conclusion and make any recommendation regarding her migraine headaches and her suitability for military service, however at the time she was offered training in another Air Force specialty she...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2001-03406
On 14 February 2001, the commander notified the applicant that he was recommending his discharge with an entry-level separation for a condition that interferes with military service, specifically, for a mental disorder. The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the applicant’s records document an unsuiting adjustment disorder and a history of mood disorder, possibly bipolar disorder existing prior to...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02938
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-02938 INDEX CODE: 100.03, 100.06 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to one that would allow him to enlist in the Air National Guard. Based on the review of his case file, his RE code 2C, “Involuntarily separated with an honorable...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03749
AFPC/DPPRS stated that they concur with the Medical Consultant and recommended that the applicant's narrative reason for separation be changed to "Secretarial Authority" and his separation code to "KFF." _________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: A majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice regarding the applicant’s requests that his narrative reason for separation of "Personality Disorder" be changed to...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01129
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01129 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code be changed to allow her to reenlist. The BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPPAE states, in part, that the RE Code of 2C (Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03336
_________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 22 March 2000, he was separated under the provisions of AFR 36-3208, paragraph 1.2 (Secretarial Authority) with a separation code of JFF and a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 3K. The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Dec 02, w/atchs....