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 (E-2),
he had a choice to either remain in the service or leave. He chose to
leave. He contends the RE code he received (2B-Discharged under
General or other-than-honorable conditions) was unfair as a result.
He also states his reason for discharge of “Misconduct” is incorrect.
He has obtained his Associates degree and has been an active member of
his community since his discharge and would like a chance to reenlist.
In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided two letters of
support and a copy of his Associate in Arts degree diploma.
His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant entered active duty on 21 November 1992. He received a
special court-martial on 2 March 1999 wherein he was found guilty of
failing to obey a lawful general regulation by wrongfully using his
government computer to create non-official documents for his personal
use between 1 April 1998 and 30 June 1998, unlawfully entering a
privately-owned warehouse between 1 November 1997 and 28 February
1998, and between 1 November 1997 and 28 February 1998, wrongfully
switching various automobile parts and vehicle identification plates
which he later misrepresented to a bankruptcy court. He was punished
with reduction to airman, confinement for six months, to perform hard
labor without confinement for three months, and restricted to the base
for two months. His commander notified him he was being discharged
with a general, under honorable conditions discharge, for misconduct.
He was discharged on 2 July 1999 after serving six years, three
months, and eleven days of active duty.
_________________________________________________________________
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 warranting changes to the
applicant’s RE code. We took notice of the applicant's complete
submission in judging the merits of the case to include his assertion
that the RE code he received was unfair and that the discharge for
misconduct was incorrect; however, we agree with the opinion and
recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and
adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Other
than his own assertions, the applicant has provided no evidence that
would lead us to believe that the discharge action was unfair or
incorrect. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we
find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in
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-
2003-03219 in Executive Session on 6 January 2004, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Peggy E. Gordon, Panel Chair
Mr. James W. Russell, III, Member
Mr. J. Dean Yount, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 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.
PEGGY E. GORDON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02725
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02725 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to one that would enable her to enlist in the Air Force Reserve (AFRES). Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02875
Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice warranting an upgrade in his discharge. We are not persuaded by the evidence presented that the commander abused his discretionary authority when he initiated the discharge action, and since we find no abuse of that authority, we find no reason to overturn the commander’s decision. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01742
A follow-up evaluation on 19 September 1996 rendered a diagnosis of major depression vs. dysthymia and she was treated with the antidepressant medicine Prozac. The applicant’s history of recurrent major depression requiring hospitalization was clearly disqualifying for continued active duty. ___________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error...
On 16 November 1999, the commander notified the applicant that she was being discharged for a condition that interfered with military service, specifically for mental disorders. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant states that the records document entry level separation for unsuiting maladjustment to military training. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPPAE states that the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01579
Member has not provided any documentation that supports changing his RE code. The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 21 Nov 03, for review and comment within 30 days. Applicant has not provided any evidence, which would lead the Board to believe otherwise.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02924 INDEX CODE: 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed so that he may reenlist in the Air Force. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 9 January...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01751
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01751 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge on 7 March 1995. After thoroughly reviewing the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01509
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR states that on 9 June 2003, they informed the applicant that his records did not indicate he was awarded the AFGCM and that his performance reports did not show he was rated as exemplary in character or behavior, and he was discharged for failure to maintain his weight in accordance with Air Force standards. To award the applicant this medal would be unfair to other service members who...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03182
He was honorably discharged on 6 August 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Completion of Required Active Service) and was assigned an RE code of 4E (i.e., Grade is airman first class or below and airman completed 31 or more months). His assigned RE code of 4E accurately reflects that he was an airman first class who completed more than 31 months of service at the time of his separation. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-1998-01243
On 14 May 98, the applicant submitted a request to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) to have his BCD upgraded to an honorable discharge. The applicant's request to have his discharge upgraded was considered and denied by the Board on 3 Aug 99. The applicant’s request with attachments is attached at Exhibit H. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: As a result of the Board’s request, the Medical Consultant...