Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01765
Original file (BC-2003-01765.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01765

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed to  allow  his  enlistment
into the armed forces.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The RE code he received upon his discharge is unfairly preventing  him  from
serving his country.

The discharge he  received  was  not  based  on  any  individual  action  or
incident, but rather as a collective whole of his time of service.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant contracted his enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 7 March
1992.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class.

On 24 May 1993, he received notification that he was being  recommended  for
discharge  for  unsatisfactory  duty  performance  (i.e.,  derelict  in  the
performance of his duty by failing to update his training  records  and  the
training records of his trainees, failed to  maintain  proper  standards  of
hygiene, failed to timely complete a copies report,  failed  to  return  his
supervisor’s phone call, failed to ensure that  a  Pacer  Ware  message  was
distributed, failed to obey a lawful order by authorizing a  subordinate  to
report for duty two hours late, and committed adultery), as evidenced  by  5
Letters of Counseling (LOCs), a Letter of Reprimand (LOR),  and  an  Article
15.  .  He  received  a  general  discharge  on  15  June  1993,  under  the
provisions of AFR 39-10 (Unsatisfactory Performance).  He  had  completed  a
total of 6 years, 3 months and 10 days and  was  serving  in  the  grade  of
airman first class (E-3) at the time of discharge.  He received an  RE  Code
of “2B”, which defined means "Separated with a general or under  other  than
honorable conditions."

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied and states,  in  part,  that
the  discharge  was  consistent  with   the   procedural   and   substantive
requirements of the discharge regulation and within the  discretion  of  the
discharge authority.  The applicant has  provided  no  facts  warranting  an
upgrade of his discharge.

The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAE states, in part, that  the  RE  code  of  “2B”  assigned  to  the
applicant is correct.  Waivers of RE codes  for  enlistment  are  considered
and approved based on the needs  of  the  respective  military  service  and
recruiting initiatives at the time of the enlistment inquiry.

The AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

Complete  copies  of  the  Air  Force  evaluations  were  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 18 July 2003 for review and response within 30 days.   However,
as of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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 error or injustice.  The applicant  has  provided  no  evidence
showing that his assigned RE code is in error or contrary to the  prevailing
instruction.  It is clear that the  decision  to  separate  him  was  proper
based on his situation at the time.  The RE code which  was  issued  at  the
time  of  his  discharge  accurately  reflects  the  circumstances  of   his
separation, i.e., separated with a general or  under  other  than  honorable
conditions discharge.  Accordingly, we do not find this code to be in  error
or unjust.  We therefore  conclude  that  no  basis  exists  upon  which  to
recommend favorable action on his request that it be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

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  Docket  Number  BC-2003-01765
in Executive Session on 8 October 2003, under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                       Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
                       Ms. Martha Maust, Member
                       Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 6 Jun 03, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 23 Jun 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 10 Jul 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jul 03.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair

Similar Decisions

  • 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-2003-01753

    Original file (BC-2003-01753.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01753 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected by changing the description of his misconduct from “a user or abuser of illegal drugs” to “a conspirator in the purchase/sale/use of an illegal drug.” His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “2B” be...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | bc-2002-03675

    Original file (bc-2002-03675.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03675 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable and his separation and reenlistment eligibility (RE) codes be changed. The applicant, while serving in the grade of airman first class, was discharged from the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01907

    Original file (BC-2003-01907.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant’s request for an upgrade of discharge on 21 August 2002. A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 18 July 2003, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03103

    Original file (BC-2002-03103.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 14 Feb 03 for review and comment within 30 days. After careful consideration of the applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we see no evidence of an error or injustice that would warrant a change in his RE code. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03103

    Original file (BC-2002-03103.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 14 Feb 03 for review and comment within 30 days. After careful consideration of the applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we see no evidence of an error or injustice that would warrant a change in his RE code. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02447

    Original file (BC-2003-02447.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was subsequently discharged from the AF with an entry-level separation and service characterization of uncharacterized, as he had not served for 180 days at the time of discharge. Additionally, he provided no facts warranting a change in his discharge. Consequently, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02844

    Original file (BC-2002-02844.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • 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 | BC-2002-04029

    Original file (BC-2002-04029.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-04029 INDEX CODE: COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE states that the applicant was discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. A complete copy of...