Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02871
Original file (BC-2003-02871.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02871
            INDEX CODE:  110.00
                 COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He would like his RE code changed so he can enter the  Air  Force  Reserves.
He was extended for the Convenience of  the  Government.   Once  the  troops
returned he requested to separate because he was about to lose  a  job  that
was being held for him.  He is older now and more mature  and  hopes  he  is
given a second chance to prove himself.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is  attached  at  Exhibit
A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force  on  23  April  1986  for  a
period of four years.

The applicant’s medical records indicate the applicant was referred  to  the
Mental Health Clinic on 5 February 1987 for evaluation for alcohol abuse.

On 9 June 1987, the mental health provider recommended the  applicant  enter
the alcohol rehabilitation program.   On  9 September  1987,  the  applicant
successfully completed the alcohol rehabilitation program.

On 30 September 1987, the applicant was notified that he  was  not  eligible
to reenlist due to receiving an Article 15.

The applicant was again referred to Mental Health for alcohol abuse  due  to
a driving while intoxicated incident on base.  The  mental  health  provider
recommended the applicant enter the alcohol rehabilitation program.

On 17 November 1987, the applicant was  notified  he  was  not  eligible  to
reenlist due to his failure in alcohol rehabilitation.

On 18 November 1987, the mental health provider  recommended  the  applicant
be separated from the Air Force.

On  2  April  1988  the  applicant  successfully   completed   the   alcohol
rehabilitation  program  and  the  mental   health   provider   noted   that
administrative action was no longer  pending;  however,  a  court  case  was
still pending.

On 6 June 1989, the mental health provider noted in the  applicant’s  record
that he was involved in an alcohol-related incident  and  failed  to  go  to
work.

On 5 July 1989, the mental health provider recommended the  applicant  enter
the  alcohol  rehabilitation  program.   The  applicant’s  medical   records
indicate he continued participation in the  alcohol  rehabilitation  program
until 5 March 1990.

On 5 December  1989,  the  applicant  was  notified  he  was  ineligible  to
reenlist due to his failure to complete the alcohol rehabilitation program.

The applicant was not recommend for  reenlistment  on  28  June  1990.   The
basis for the nonrecommendation was that the applicant  was  an  ineffective
performer, lacked motivation  and  initiative,  non-complied  with  training
requirements and a Unfavorable Information File (UIF) had been  established.
 Applicant did not appeal the decision.

The applicant was honorably discharged on 23 May 1991, under the  provisions
of AFR 39-10, completed extended enlistment and was issued  an  RE  code  of
2X, which indicates the  servicemember  is  a  first-term,  second-term,  or
career airman  considered  but  not  selected  for  reenlistment  under  the
Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP).

EXAMINER'S NOTE: An Air Force evaluation was not  received;  however,  prior
to forwarding the case to the Board the Air Force  determined  that  the  RE
code assigned is correct.

_________________________________________________________________

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 waive the failure to timely file.

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 that 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-2003-02871
in Executive Session on 2 December 2003, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                       Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Member
                       Mr. James W. Russell III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 Aug 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR dated 7 Nov 03.




                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01423

    Original file (BC-2003-01423.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPPPR states that the applicant is not eligible for award of the Air Force Good Conduct (AFGC) Medal. Since he received his first Article 15 during this assignment, he would not be eligible for a decoration upon completion of his overseas tour. After reviewing the evidence of record, we are not persuaded that the applicant’s records are in error or that he has been the victim of an injustice.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02101

    Original file (BC-2005-02101.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02101 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION: 17 FEB 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) and separation codes be changed to allow him to reenter military service. A medical note from the Alcohol Rehabilitation Committee, dated 1 March 1988,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01212

    Original file (BC-2003-01212.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01212 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. On 11 Jan 01, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered applicant's request for upgrade of his discharge to honorable and to change his reason for discharge. The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00382

    Original file (BC-2003-00382.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 11 January 1989, his supervisor did not recommend him for reenlistment. Applicant’s performance profile follows: PERIOD ENDING EVALUATION OF PERFORMANCE 14 Apr 87 8 1 Dec 87 7 1 Dec 88 7 _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPAE recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the applicant has not provided any additional information to indicate that his RE code was erroneously or unfairly assessed to his file. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00155

    Original file (BC-2004-00155.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Air Force policy is that entry-level separations/uncharacterized service characterizations are given to servicemembers who have not completed more than 180 days of continuous active service. A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 20 February 2004, for review and response. Shortly after...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-00046

    Original file (BC-2006-00046.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The arrest report revealed a blood pressure reading of 200/140 at the time of the arrest. Review of the service medical records revealed that the applicant was placed in an alcohol rehabilitation program 10 Nov 81. The applicant's alcohol use during the last two years of service is well documented in the service medical records from the Alcoholism Rehabilitation Center at Sheppard AFB, in addition to reports from his commander of two civilian arrests for alcohol abuse, one for public...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01241

    Original file (BC-2003-01241.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAES states the applicant’s reenlistment was processed without her commander’s endorsement and the Military Personnel Flight erroneously issued a $11,442.07 (before tax) SRB to applicant in July 2001. A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force Evaluation and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2001-03406

    Original file (BC-2001-03406.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 14 February 2001, the commander notified the applicant that he was recommending his discharge with an entry-level separation for a condition that interferes with military service, specifically, for a mental disorder. The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the applicant’s records document an unsuiting adjustment disorder and a history of mood disorder, possibly bipolar disorder existing prior to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00082

    Original file (BC-2005-00082.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was recommended for separation from the Air Force for mental disorders. On 19 February 2004, the applicant submitted a waiver of his rights to a board hearing on the condition he receive an honorable discharge. Evidence of the record clearly shows the applicant’s diagnosed personality disorder rendered him unsuitable for continued military service and that he had the benefit of extensive mental health treatment over a prolonged period of time prior to his discharge.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01129

    Original file (BC-2002-01129.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01129 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code be changed to allow her to reenlist. The BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPPAE states, in part, that the RE Code of 2C (Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level...