Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01942
Original file (BC-2003-01942.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01942
            INDEX CODE:  100.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code 2C (Involuntarily  separated
with an honorable discharge;  or  entry  level  separation  without
characterization of service) be changed to a better code.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He does not know if the RE code 2C is unjust, but would like it  to
be reconsidered in order that  he  may  rejoin  the  military.   He
cannot join the Air Force again because of the code 2C, and another
branch requires a two-year wait.

In support of his appeal, applicant submitted a copy of his DD Form
214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force  on  7  May  02  for  a
period of four years.

On 7  Nov  02,  the  squadron  commander  initiated  administrative
discharge  action  against   the   applicant   for   unsatisfactory
performance   or   conduct;   specifically,   unsatisfactory   duty
performance.

The reasons for the proposed action were that  on  23  Aug  02  and
4 Sep 02, applicant failed  to  make  satisfactory  progress  in  a
required technical training program.  The applicant was  eliminated
from the Supply Management Apprentice training course for  academic
deficiency after failing the written  Test  1,  Version  A,  course
examination twice with scores of 69% on both exams--minimum passing
was 70%.  On 10 Sep 02, he failed the written Test  3,  Version  B,
with  a  score  of  63%--minimum  passing  was   72%.    Prior   to
disenrollment, applicant was counseled concerning  his  performance
and received individualized assistance with negative results.

The commander recommended that the applicant be given an  honorable
discharge.  On that same date, applicant  acknowledged  receipt  of
the discharge notification.  He waived his right to consult counsel
and to submit statements in his own behalf.   On  14  Nov  02,  the
staff judge advocate found the case to be legally  sufficient.   On
19 Nov 02, the discharge authority directed applicant be discharged
with an honorable discharge without probation and rehabilitation.

On 21 Nov 02, applicant  was  honorably  discharged  by  reason  of
“unsatisfactory performance,” and was issued an RE code of 2C.   He
was credited with 6 months and 15 days of active duty service.

On  12  May  03,  applicant’s  DD Form  214,  was  administratively
corrected to reflect the rank of AB in Item 4a, pay  grade  E-1  in
Item 4b, and Primary Specialty, 1C311 rather than 2S011 in Item 11.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommended  denial  of  applicant’s  request.   They
found that the discharge was consistent  with  the  procedural  and
substantive   requirements    of    the    discharge    regulation.
Additionally, that the discharge was within the sound discretion of
the discharge authority.  They also noted that  the  applicant  did
not submit any new evidence or identify any  errors  or  injustices
that occurred in the discharge processing.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPAE reviewed this application and indicated that  the  RE
code of 2C is correct.

A complete  copy  of  the  Air  Force  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 18 Jul 03 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.   At  the  time  a
member is separated from the Air Force, they are  furnished  an  RE
Code  predicated  upon  the  quality  of  their  service  and   the
circumstances of their separation.  The assigned code reflects  the
Air Force’s position  regarding  whether  or  not,  or  under  what
circumstances,  the  individual  should  be  allowed  to  reenlist.
Applicant’s RE code  of  2C  accurately  reflects  his  involuntary
separation   with   an   honorable   discharge.    After    careful
consideration of the evidence provided, we are not  persuaded  that
the assigned RE code is in error or unjust or that  an  upgrade  of
the RE code is warranted.  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 AFBCMR Docket  Number
BC-2003-01942 in Executive Session on 10 September 2003, under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
      Ms. Cheryl Jacobson, Member
      Ms. Martha Maust, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 12 Jun 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 1 Jul 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 11 Jul 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jul 03.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00016

    Original file (BC-2003-00016.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on symptoms consistent with asthma and the bronchoprovocation test positive for abnormal bronchoreactivity consistent with asthma, he underwent entry level separation for the disqualifying diagnosis of asthma existing prior to service (erroneous enlistment: erroneous enlistment is one that would not have occurred had the relevant facts been known by the Air Force and it was not the result of fraudulent conduct on the part of the applicant). A complete copy of the evaluation is at...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01729

    Original file (BC-2007-01729.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPPRS states that based on the documentation on file in the applicant’s master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. Additionally, the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing, and he provided no facts warranting a change to his RE code. The complete DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • 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 | CY2002 | BC-2002-02510

    Original file (BC-2002-02510.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02510 INDEX CODE: 100.03, 100.06 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed from 2C to 1J so that he may serve in the Air National Guard. He was discharged on 21 Jul 00 and issued an RE code of "2C.". ...

  • 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 | CY2002 | 0200056

    Original file (0200056.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00056 INDEX CODE: 110.00, 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C be changed to allow eligibility to reenter the Air Force. In view of the foregoing, we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected by deleting the words “and conduct” from his...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | 0203134

    Original file (0203134.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we find no impropriety in the characterization of the applicant's discharge. Likewise, since we have determined favorable consideration of the applicant’s request for a discharge upgrade is not appropriate at this time, his request for his RE Code to be changed is not possible. ___________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 26 March...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02492

    Original file (BC-2002-02492.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was discharged effective 21 May 2002 with an uncharacterized entry-level separation with a separation code JDA (fraudulent entry into military service) and a reentry code of 2C (entry level separation without characterization of service). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPAE reviewed the applicant’s case file and concludes that the RE code of 2C is correct. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04021

    Original file (BC-2002-04021.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...