Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01351
Original file (BC-2003-01351.doc) Auto-classification: Denied




                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01351
            INDEX CODE:  100.03

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to  one  that  would
enable him to reenlist in the Air Force.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Since his discharge he has worked at several jobs where he  has  never
been late nor has he had any problems.  He states  that  his  previous
flaws  are  no  longer  an  issue  and  he  misses  the   feeling   of
accomplishment being in the Air Force provided.

In support of his  appeal,  the  applicant  has  provided  a  personal
statement and a copy of his DD Form 214,  Certificate  of  Release  or
Discharge from Active Duty.

His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 22 August 2000.  He
attained the rank of Airman  (Amn/E2)  with  a  date  of  rank  of  22
February 2001.  On 19 September 2001, the applicant failed his  Career
Development Course (CDC) test that would have enabled him to  progress
in his training level.  On 19 December 2001, the applicant failed  his
CDC retest.  On 30 November 2001, the applicant received a  letter  of
reprimand (LOR) for intentionally misplacing an official document  and
for  falsifying  official  orders.    Additionally,   an   Unfavorable
Information File (UIF) was  established.   He  received  a  letter  of
counseling (LOC) on 17 October 2001  for  being  late  for  duty.   He
received a Letter of Admonishment (LOA) on 18 October 2001, again  for
being late for duty.  On 30 January 2002, the applicant  was  given  a
LOC that was placed  in  his  existing  UIF.   On  2  April  2002  the
applicant was notified that he was being recommended for discharge  in
accordance with  Air  Force  Instruction  (AFI)  36-3208,  Failure  to
Progress in On-The-Job Training.   The  discharge  was  found  legally
sufficient on 12 April 2002.  The applicant  exercised  his  right  to
consult counsel and to  submit  statements  on  his  behalf.   He  was
honorably discharged, without Probation and Rehabilitation  (P&R),  on
19 April 2002 after serving for 1 year, 7 months, and 29 days.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS reviewed this case and recommended  denial.   DPPRS  states
that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and  substantive
requirements of the discharge regulation and within the  discretionary
powers  of  the  discharge  authority.   No  new   evidence   or   any
identification of error or injustice has been presented to  warrant  a
change to the discharge.

DPPRS’s complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.


AFPC/DPPAE has reviewed this case and verified that the RE code of 2C,
“Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge;  or  entry-level
separation without characterization of service” is correct.

DPPAE’s evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on
23 May 2003 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 timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice.  After a thorough review  of  the
evidence of record and applicant's submission, we  are  not  persuaded
that his contention of no longer being affected by  “previous  flaws”,
in and by themselves, are  sufficiently  persuasive  to  override  the
rationale provided by the Air Force.  The brief amount of time between
his discharge and his application, coupled  with  the  fact  that  his
previous commander felt he was a  poor  candidate  for  Probation  and
Rehabilitation (P&R), figured heavily in our decision.   Consequently,
we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force  offices
of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale expressed  as  the
basis for our decision that the applicant has failed  to  sustain  his
burden of establishing  that  he  has  suffered  either  an  error  or
injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of persuasive  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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2003-01351 in Executive Session on 5 August 2003, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Vaughn E. Schlunz, Panel Chair
      Mr. Mike Novel, Member
      Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 07 Apr 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 8 May 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 13 May 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 May 03.




                                   VAUGHN E. SCHLUNZ
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03812

    Original file (BC-2002-03812.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    For this misconduct, he received an LOR dated 9 February 2001. For this misconduct, he received an LOR dated 14 February 2001. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we note that in the 11 months and 2 days that the applicant was on active duty, he received 2 LOCs, 4 LORs, and an Article 15.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02310

    Original file (BC-2007-02310.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02310 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. On 18 January 2000, he received an LOR for failing to report to work on time. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01234

    Original file (BC-2003-01234.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, the recoupment of bonus monies is driven by the assigned SPD code. The AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D. DFAS-POCC/DE recommends the applicant’s request to change his SPD code be denied. The applicant originally requested his RE code also be changed; however, AFPC/DPPRSP has administratively corrected his records to reflect he was issued RE code “1J.” Applicant’s contentions regarding the separation program designator (SPD) he was assigned at the time of his discharge are...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-04111

    Original file (BC-2003-04111.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-04111 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The “JCR” (Weight Control Failure) separation program designator (SPD) code he received be fixed or upgraded so he is not required to pay back the bonus he received when he enlisted in the Air Force. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02214

    Original file (BC-2003-02214.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 22 May 2003, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied his request that his discharge be upgraded to honorable and his RE Code and reason and authority for discharge be changed. The AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: He will always have a mark against him as long as his records remain unchanged. Exhibit B.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03926

    Original file (BC-2002-03926.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 16 January 1987, the applicant was notified by his commander that he was recommending applicant for a discharge for a pattern of minor disciplinary infractions and recommended a general discharge. AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE stated that the applicant’s requests his Reenlistment Eligibility code 2B “Involuntarily separated with a general or under other than honorable conditions discharge” be changed to allow him to enlist in the Air Force Reserve. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02903

    Original file (BC-2002-02903.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He received an RE code of 2C, which defined means “Involuntary separation with honorable discharge; or entry-level separation without characterization of service.” _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant found that no change to applicant’s record was warranted. AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPPAE verified that the RE code of 2C was correct. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | 0202847

    Original file (0202847.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to her discharge are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied. As of this date, this office has received no response. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00392

    Original file (BC-2007-00392.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 14 January 2003, the applicant received an LOC for failure to obey an order or regulation. DPPAE states there is no evidence in the applicant’s record to support that the RE code she received is incorrect or that it created an injustice. Exhibit F. Letter of Recommendation, dated 3 May 07.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-1996-02954-2

    Original file (BC-1996-02954-2.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s separation, and, the rationale for the earlier decision by the Board, see Exhibit E. On 1 May 2003, the applicant submitted a request for reconsideration, contending that his discharge was unfair and that he did not commit fraud against the government. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: In earlier findings, the Board determined that there was...