Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00149
Original file (BC-2004-00149.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00149
            INDEX NUMBER: 100.06

      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed to permit his  reentry  on
active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Prior to his discharge, he was on  a  remote  assignment  and  desperate  to
return to the Continental United States (CONUS) to find his  wife  and  son.
When he questioned his commander as to how he could  return  to  the  CONUS,
his commander suggested that he could start Article 15 proceedings and  give
him a quick discharge.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force  on  21
August 1996.  On 10 June 2002, he received notification that  he  was  being
recommended for discharge for misconduct - minor  disciplinary  infractions.
The commander’s reasons for the action  were  applicant’s  receipt  of  five
letters of reprimand for failing to go at the time prescribed to  his  place
of duty on two separation occasions; failing to  go  to  an  appointment  at
Life Skills; failing to follow an order to  attend  a  mandatory  formation;
being  insubordinate  towards  a  Noncommissioned  Officer  (NCO)   on   the
telephone; and a  verbal  counseling  for  failing  to  attend  a  mandatory
Weighted Airman Promotion System (WAPS) testing appointment.  The  discharge
authority approved the discharge and he  received  a  general  discharge  on
1 July 2002, under the provisions  of  AFI  36-3208  (Misconduct),  and  was
issued RE code 2B (Involuntarily separated with a  general  or  under-other-
than-honorable-conditions (UOTHC) discharge).  He had completed a  total  of
5 years, 10 months, and 11 days of active service and  was  serving  in  the
grade of senior airman (E-4) at the time of discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied and states,  in  part,  that
the  discharge  was  consistent  with   the   procedural   and   substantive
requirements of the discharge regulation and was within  the  discretion  of
the discharge authority.  The applicant has not submitted  any  evidence  of
any errors or injustices that occurred in the processing of his discharge.

The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  the  applicant
on 13 February 2004 for review and response within 30 days.  However, 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 error or injustice to  warrant  upgrading  the  applicant’s  RE
code. In this respect, we note that the applicant’s discharge appears to  be
in compliance with the governing Air Force  Instruction  in  effect  at  the
time of his separation and that he was afforded  all  the  rights  to  which
entitled. Furthermore, he provides  no  evidence  that  his  separation  was
inappropriate or that  the  assigned  RE  code  reflecting  his  involuntary
separation was in error or unjust.  There  being  insufficient  evidence  to
the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting  the  relief
sought.

_________________________________________________________________

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-2004-00149
in Executive Session on 14 April 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Panel Chair
                       Ms. Kathy L. Boockholdt, Member
                       Mr. Michael J. Novel, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 12 Jan 04.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 12 Feb 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Feb 04.




                                   ROSCOE HINTON, JR.
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00087

    Original file (BC-2004-00087.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied and states, in part, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice to warrant upgrading his RE code. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-04109

    Original file (BC-2003-04109.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He received a general discharge on 7 November 1985, under the provisions of AFR 39-10 (Misconduct - Pattern Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline). However, as of this date, this office has received no response. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicant’s complete submission, we find no evidence of error or injustice.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02560

    Original file (BC-2004-02560.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02560 INDEX NUMBER: 110.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be reinstated to active duty or, in the alternative, be granted a Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code that will allow her to enter the Reserves. On 23 Jun 04, the CCQ recommended to the training...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01798

    Original file (BC-2004-01798.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was serving in the grade of airman first class (E-3) at the time of discharge. The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 1 July 2004 for review and response within 30 days. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that relief should be granted.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02867

    Original file (BC-2004-02867.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 24 Feb 97, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request to have his discharge upgraded to honorable. A complete copy of the 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 15 Oct 04 for review and comment within 30 days. Based on his overall record of service, the contents of the FBI...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03507

    Original file (BC-2003-03507.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 7 Oct 92, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied the applicant’s request for upgrade of his discharge to honorable. They also noted applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing and provided no other facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge. After careful consideration of the evidence of record, we found no evidence that the actions taken to effect the applicant’s discharge were improper or...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01670

    Original file (BC-2004-01670.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01670 INDEX NUMBER: 100.06, 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed from RE-2 to RE-1 to permit reentry into the military. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03070

    Original file (BC-2004-03070.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The base legal office reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support discharge and recommended applicant be discharged with an honorable discharge without probation and rehabilitation. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS 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. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03926

    Original file (BC-2002-03926.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 16 January 1987, the applicant was notified by his commander that he was recommending applicant for a discharge for a pattern of minor disciplinary infractions and recommended a general discharge. AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE stated that the applicant’s requests his Reenlistment Eligibility code 2B “Involuntarily separated with a general or under other than honorable conditions discharge” be changed to allow him to enlist in the Air Force Reserve. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03246

    Original file (BC-2004-03246.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/JA also recommends denial of the applicant’s request. The applicant opines that since the withholding was a discretionary action, he believes it appropriate to discuss the necessity of the action taken by his commander in light of his exemplary record up to the time the action was taken. He states the discretionary action was not required by the circumstances.