RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01673
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be
upgraded to general (under honorable conditions).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
At the time he entered the Air Force, it was for family problems; the
authorities told him to join. At the age of 18, he was arrogant and
frustrated. Had he been older and more mature, he would not have
behaved like this. He has remained a good citizen in civilian life,
married for 10 years and has one daughter.
Applicant’s complete application is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic on
22 May 1973. The applicant was involuntarily discharged under the
provision of AFR 39-12 (unfitness) with service characterized as under
other than honorable conditions (UOTHC), with a RE code of 2B on 16
May 1974 in the grade of airman basic. He served five months and nine
days of total active military service.
The only available documentation indicates that on 13 February 1974,
the applicant was convicted by a Special Court-Martial for six counts
of leaving his place of duty without authority, two counts of being
disrespectful to superior NCOs, and six counts of failure to obey
lawful orders. These incidents occurred between November 1973 and
January 1974. He was sentenced to forfeit $217 per month for six
months and confined to hard labor for four months. He had 100 days of
lost time.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial. Based on the documentation in the
file, they believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural
and substantive requirements of the discharge directives in effect at
the time of his discharge. Additionally, the discharge was within the
discretion of the discharge authority. Applicant did not submit any
new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the
discharge proceedings. The applicant provided no facts warranting an
upgrade of the discharge.
AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPPAE stated that the Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code 2,
Ineligible to reenlist in the Regular Air Force” is correct. The
applicant’s request should be denied. He received the proper RE upon
discharge.
AFPC/DPPAE complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on
17 June 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 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. Based upon the presumption of
regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs and without evidence
to the contrary, we must assume that the applicant's discharge was
proper and in compliance with appropriate directives. We find no
evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the
documentation that has been submitted in support of applicant's
appeal, we do not believe he has suffered from an injustice.
Therefore, based on the available evidence of record, we find no basis
upon which to favorably consider 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 Docket Number BC-
2003-01673 Executive Session on 21 August 2003, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Member
Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 9 May 03, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, undated.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Jun 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-2003-02017
She provided no other facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice that would warrant an upgrade of her discharge to general. Other than her own uncorroborated assertions, evidence has not been provided which would lead us to believe that the action taken to affect her discharge from the Air Force was improper or contrary to the provisions of the governing regulations in effect at...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04109
Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ 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. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...
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 | CY2006 | BC-2006-01150
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01150 INDEX CODE: 100.00, 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 19 OCTOBER 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02026
He was presented to a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) due to chronic pain in his left tibia. The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPPAE states the RE Code assigned at the time of his 6 December 1994 medical discharge is correct. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicant’s complete submission, we find no evidence of an error or injustice.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01193
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01193 INDEX CODE: 100.03, 100.06 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of “2X” be changed. The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A complete copy...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02958
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02958 INDEX CODE: 128.10 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 28 JANUARY 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be relieved from her Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) debt. On 21 January 2005, she enlisted in the Air Force Reserve PALACE FRONT program for one year. DPPRS concludes the...
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-2003-02863
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02863 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the...