RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03160
INDEX CODE: 112.10
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
XXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed from 2C (involuntary
separation with honorable discharge) to enable him to be reinstated.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He tried his best to show a positive attitude and good conduct while on
active duty and wishes to be reinstated.
In support of his application, the applicant provides copies of his
notification of discharge recommendation, his response to the discharge
notification, and his discharge certificate. The applicant’s complete
submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 25 November 2002, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the
age of 23 in the grade of airman basic (E-1) for a period of six years.
On 25 March 2003, the applicant was recommended for disenrollment from Air
Transportation Apprentice technical training after failing three
consecutive blocks of instruction. The applicant was then entered into
training for the Aerospace Medical Service Apprentice career field. On 10
June 2003, the applicant was disenrolled from training after failing two
progress checks. On 2 July 2003, his commander notified the applicant that
he was being recommended for discharge due to unsatisfactory performance.
On 8 July 2003, after consulting counsel, the applicant submitted a
statement in his own behalf. On 10 July 2003, the Squadron Section
Commander signed a recommendation for the applicant’s discharge based on
unsatisfactory performance. On 15 July 2003, the recommendation was found
to be legally sufficient by the Staff Judge Advocate. On 24 July 2003, the
discharge authority approved the discharge under the provisions of AFI 36-
3208, paragraph 5.26.1, finding the applicant unsuitable for further
military service. The applicant was honorably discharged effective 28 July
2003 with a separation code JHJ (unsatisfactory performance) and a reentry
code of 2C (involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge). He had
served eight months and four days on active duty.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial. DPPRS states that the applicant’s discharge
was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the
discharge regulation and was within the sound discretion of the discharge
authority. The applicant did not provide any evidence or identify any
errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge process. The DPPRS
evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 7
November 2003 for review and response (Exhibit D). 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 probable error or injustice. The applicant did not provide
persuasive 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 RE code which was issued at the
time of the applicant’s separation accurately reflects the circumstances of
his separation and we do not find this code to be in error or unjust. In
view of the foregoing, we 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 this application in Executive
Session on 30 January 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Panel Chair
Mr. Michael J. Maglio, Member
Ms. Carolyn B. Willis, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR
Docket Number BC-2003-03160:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Sep 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 3 Oct 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Nov 03.
WAYNE R. GRACIE
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01192
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01192 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 19 OCT 2008 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2B (involuntarily separated with a general or under other than honorable condition (UOTHC) discharge) be changed. On 1 Feb...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00599
The discharge authority approved the separation and directed the applicant be discharged with an honorable discharge without probation and rehabilitation. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied and states based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. He provided...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01942
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. They found that the discharge was...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03570
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03570 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The reason for his discharge be changed to honorable. On 20 September 2002, while enrolled in technical training, applicant was notified by his commander that in accordance with AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airman (personality disorder),...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00322
Applicant was discharged from the Air Force on 29 Mar 02. The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 21 Mar 03 for review and comment within 30 days. After a thorough review of the evidence of record, we find no error in this case and are not persuaded by his contentions that he has been the victim of an injustice.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03336
_________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 22 March 2000, he was separated under the provisions of AFR 36-3208, paragraph 1.2 (Secretarial Authority) with a separation code of JFF and a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 3K. The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Dec 02, w/atchs....
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00455
Toward the end of basic training, he received orders. AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE stated that the applicant separated on 9 June 1994, after serving 3 months and 29 days active service. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 9 June 1994, he was separated under the provisions of AFR 39-10...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00727
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00727 INDEX CODE: 100.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C (Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service) be changed. The evidence of record supports the stated reasons for...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04013
We are not persuaded by the evidence presented that the uncharacterized entry-level separation received by the former member should be changed to an honorable discharge. Rather, as was noted by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, an entry- level separation with uncharacterized service is used in those cases where the member has not yet completed six months of service at the time separation proceedings were, for whatever reason, initiated. However, after a thorough review of...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02557
On 12 Jun 01, applicant received an uncharacterized entry-level separation, by reason of “Entry Level Performance and Conduct,” and was issued an RE code of 2C (Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry- level separation without characterization of service). The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing and he provided no other facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge. At the time members...