RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03091
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to one that would
enable him to reenlist.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
At the time of his discharge he was told that he could reenlist in six
months. He has tried to enlist in the Air National Guard (ANG) but
was not able to because of the RE code.
In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided copies of a DD
Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from
the Armed Forces of the United States, and a DD Form 214, Certificate
of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.
His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant entered active duty on 29 August 1990. He was discharged
four months and six days later, on 4 January 1991, in accordance with
Air Force Instruction (AFI) 39-10 (entry-level performance). His
commander notified him on 2 January 1991 that he was being recommended
for discharge due to minor disciplinary infractions. On 17 December
1990, he stole two sets of earrings and a gold locket, valued at $45,
from the Base Exchange. He received an Article 15 with punishment of
forfeiture of $150, seven days extra duty and seven days restriction.
His service characterization was listed as uncharacterized as he had
served less than 180 days.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRSP recommends denial. Upon addressing the discharge process,
DPPRSP states the applicant did not submit any new evidence or
identify any errors or injustices that occurred in his discharge
processing. Additionally, he provided no facts warranting a change in
his discharge. DPPRSP holds that the discharge was consistent with
the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge
regulation and was within the discharge authorities discretion.
DPPRSP’s 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 October 2003 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 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 an error or injustice. Applicant’s contentions are
duly noted to include his allegation that he was told he could
reenlist in six months; 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-
2003-03091 in Executive Session on 10 December 2003, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Member
Mr. J. Dean Yount, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 23 Sep 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRSP, dated 16 Oct 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Oct 03.
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02081
His otherwise superior duty performance does not overcome the facts of the record documenting unsuitability for continued military service, in particular the making of threats against other in his unit, but clearly earned him the Honorable characterization of service he received. His otherwise superior duty performance does not overcome the facts of the record documenting unsuitability for continued service, in particular the making of threats against others in his unit. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02030
Prior regulations used the more inclusive and less confusing “character and behavior disorder.” Since the applicant was also diagnosed on AXIS II: with Abnormal Dependent Personality Traits and demonstrated misconduct more consistent with maladaptive personality traits than a learning disorder, the medical consultant concludes the narrative reason for separation is appropriate. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02884
Additionally, his commanders recommended a UOTHC discharge. The applicant, while serving in the grade of sergeant, was discharged from the Air Force on 23 April 1992 under the provisions of AFR 39-10 (Request for Discharge in Lieu of Court-Martial) with an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge. The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of discharge on 25 January 1996.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03214
The reason for this action was that he was eliminated from the Security Forces Technical Training Course for academic deficiency after failing block II three times with scores of 66%, 54% and 68%. 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. Thomas S. Markiewicz Chair AFBCMR BC-2003-03214 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01155
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01155 COUNSEL: No HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His character of service, separation authority, separation code JFC, narrative reason for separation and reenlistment eligibility (RE) 2C code be changed so that he may pursue a career in the military. The Air Force based this on the reported...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01660
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01660 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His separation code (JFX) be changed. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02923
On 14 September 1993, she was notified by her commander that she was being recommended for discharge due to failure in alcohol abuse rehabilitation. The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states that getting out of the Air Force was one of the biggest mistakes she has made. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02386
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02386 INDEX NUMBER:136.00 COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214 be corrected to reflect that he completed over 20 years of active service. He remained on the TDRL until he was permanently retired for disability effective 14 Apr 71, with a disability rating of 80%. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03426
In this respect, we note that the governing instruction in effect at the time of the applicant’s discharge provided that members applying for pregnancy separation had the option to elect to be released from active duty and transferred to the Air Force Reserve or to be discharged. The applicant has not provided any evidence to show that she requested a release from active duty and transfer to the Air Force Reserve. ___________________________________________________________________ The...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03219
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03219 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code and reason for discharge be changed. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: When he was reduced in grade from senior airman (E-4) to airman...