RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02928
INDEX CODE: 100.06
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2X be changed.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
At the time he separated from the Air Force, he was going through a
family crisis, and was acting out. He was just young. He would now
like the opportunity to reenter the military, but his RE code prevents
him from doing so.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided copies of his
separation documents and character reference statements.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 31 Jul 92 for a period
of four years in the grade of airman basic.
Applicant's Enlistment Performance Report (EPR) profile follows:
PERIOD ENDING EVALUATION
30 Mar 94 3
5 Dec 94 3
13 Jun 95 4
On 31 Dec 95, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFI
36-3208 (Completion of Required Active Service) and furnished an
honorable discharge. He was assigned an RE code of 2X (First-term,
second-term, or career airman considered but not selected for
reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP). The
applicant was credited with three years, five months, and one day of
active service.
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 excuse the failure to timely file.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice. The 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2003-02928 in Executive Session on 2 Dec 03, 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 29 Aug 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03058
The supervisor stated that he was unable to select the applicant for reenlistment at the time because the applicant had not demonstrated the desire or capability to accept the additional duties and responsibilities required of a career airman in today’s Air Force. The evidence of record indicates that the applicant was not selected for reenlistment in the Air Force. Furthermore, it now seems that the applicant has the motivation and the desire to commit himself to the service of his country.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00382
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-2004-02091
On 24 Jun 04, the applicant was honorably discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Completion of Required Active Service), and furnished an RE code of 2X (First-term, second term, or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP)). ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPAE recommends the application be denied and states, in part, after a review of his military...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01989
A resume of applicant’s available enlisted performance reports (EPR) profile follows: PERIOD CLOSING OVERALL EVALUATION 10 Nov 91 4 23 Dec 92 4 23 Dec 93 4 15 Aug 94 2 (Referral Rpt) 15 Aug 95 2 (Referral Rpt) On 14 Feb 96, applicant was honorably released from active duty under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, by reason of completion of required active service, and was issued an RE code of 2X. RICHARD A. PETERSON Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2005-01989 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having...
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 | CY2004 | BC-2003-03361
In May 92, the commander permanently decertified the applicant from the PRP based on the recommendation from the MHC that, although he did not suffer any specific disorder, the applicant’s personality traits, preoccupation with personal problems, difficulty in adjusting to shift changes, and marginal motivation had not improved with treatment. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPRSP notes the applicant was discharged involuntarily upon expiration of term of service...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03340
The applicant has not provided sufficient evidence that the commander’s decision to deny him reenlistment was inappropriate or not in compliance with Air Force policy. The complete 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 31 Jan 03 for review and comment within 30 days. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02871
On 18 November 1987, the mental health provider recommended the applicant be separated from the Air Force. 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 following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2003-02871 in Executive Session on 2 December 2003, under the provisions of AFI...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04112
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-04112 INDEX CODE: 110.00, 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 4H be changed to allow eligibility to enlist in the Air National Guard. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). Sufficient relevant evidence has...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03186
He also provided no facts warranting a change in his discharge. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPRSP evaluation is at Exhibit C. EXAMINER'S NOTE: An Air Force evaluation pertaining to the RE code was not received; however, prior to forwarding the case to the Board the Air Force determined that the RE code assigned is correct. Therefore, the applicant’s RE code apparently was appropriately assigned and accurately reflected the circumstances of his separation, and, we find no evidence to...