RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02795
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed.
_________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He has continuously been employed since his discharge, has purchased a new
vehicle, got married and is only two semesters from receiving his degree.
He would like to enroll in an Army continuation program for his degree,
which would save him thousands of dollars in student loans.
In support of the appeal, the applicant submits two personal statements.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit
A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 21 August 2001. On 26
March 2002, he was notified by his commander that he was being recommended
for discharge for minor disciplinary infractions. The reason for this
action was that on 1 and 6 December 2001 he failed to refrain from
providing alcohol for a person under age 21, and received an Article 15
with a $375 forfeiture of pay. On 14 December 2001, he was derelict in the
performance of duties because he failed to return to class after break, and
on 3 Mar 2002, he failed to show for daily call to quarters. He received a
letter of counseling for each incident. He also received an Article 15
with a $400 forfeiture of pay when he wrongfully used provoking words
toward other airmen on two different accounts on 11 January 2002. The
discharge authority approved the separation and ordered an under honorable
conditions (general) discharge without probation and rehabilitation. On
4 April 2002, he was discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3208,
Administrative Separation of Airmen (misconduct) and was issued an under
honorable conditions (general) discharge. He received an RE code of 2B,
separated with a general or under-other-than-honorable-conditions (UOTHC).
He served 7 months and 14 days on active duty.
Applicant does not contest the accuracy of the RE code and after reviewing
the applicable instruction, AFI 36-2606, it appears the RE code issued is
accurate.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial. The applicant did not submit any new
evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the
discharge process. Additionally, he provided no facts warranting a change
in his discharge.
The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 7 Nov
03, for review and comment within 30 days. 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 timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of an error or injustice. Applicant’s contentions are duly
noted; however, we are not persuaded the applicant has been the victim of
an error or injustice. At the time members are separated from the Air
Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their
service and circumstances of their separation. After a thorough review of
the evidence of record, we believe that given the circumstances surrounding
the applicant’s separation, the RE code issued was in accordance with the
appropriate directives. Therefore, we find no basis upon which to
recommend favorable action on 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 Docket Number BC-2003-02795
in Executive Session on 17 December 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chair
Mr. E. David Hoard, Member
Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 Aug 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 26 Aug 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Nov 03.
DAVID C. VAN GASBECK
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | bc-2003-02406
________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS states that they believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. Although the RE code assigned at the time of her separation was accurate, we believe the applicant should be provided the opportunity to apply for enlistment in the armed services. DAVID C. VAN GASBECK Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2003-02406 INDEX CODE: 112.00 MEMORANDUM...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02771
On 4 December 2000, the commander notified the applicant that he was recommending a discharge for a pattern of minor disciplinary infractions and recommended a general discharge. He received an Article 15 on 14 November 2000 for disorderly conduct, and Record of Individual Counseling (ROC), 29 September 2000, for failure to go to appointed place of duty on time and 31 August 2000, for failure to keep dormitory room in inspection order. At the time members are separated from the Air Force,...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02770
On 2 Jul 98, applicant requested a hardship discharge based on family difficulties. At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of their separation. Additionally, we note the assigned RE code of 4A is a code that can be waived for prior service enlistment consideration, provided applicant meets all other requirements for enlistment under an existing prior service program, and depending on...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02213
The applicant, while serving in the grade of Airman First Class, was separated from the Air Force under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) on 27 May 1977. His SPD reveals separation under the provisions of AFR 39-12, Section F, Request for Discharge in Lieu of Trial by Courts-Martial. Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, WV, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-03243 INDEX CODE: COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for separation on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be changed to show he was separated to attend school full time in an Officer Training Program. A complete copy of the evaluation is...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01852
________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends that the applicant’s separation code and narrative reason for separation (DD Form 214, Blocks 26 & 28) be changed to “KFF—Secretarial Authority” (see Exhibit C). Therefore, we recommend that the narrative reason for his separation and corresponding separation code be changed to reflect “Secretarial Authority.” 4. BRENDA L. ROMINE Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2003-01852 MEMORANDUM FOR...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03451
He had completed a total of 9 years and 27 days and was serving in the grade of staff sergeant (E-5) at the time of discharge. At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of their separation. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03104
He received a separation designator code of JBK and a RE code of 2X, “First-term, second-term, or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the SRP”. At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of their separation. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03104
He received a separation designator code of JBK and a RE code of 2X, “First-term, second-term, or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the SRP”. At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of their separation. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03450
DAVID C. VAN GASBECK Panel Chair Attachment: Ltrs, HQ AFPC/DPPPOO, dtd 17 Nov 03, and HQ AFPC/DPAMP, dated 4 Nov 03, with attachment AFBCMR BC-2003-03450 INDEX CODE: 102.00 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code, Air Force Instruction 36-2603, and having assured compliance with the provisions of the above regulation, the decision of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records is announced, and it is directed that: The...