FOURTH ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02377
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed to a reenlistment
eligible code.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 23 March 2001, the AFBCMR reconsidered applicant’s request that he be
returned to active duty in the grade of master sergeant, with service
credit for the period following his discharge up to his return to active
duty; his court-martial conviction be removed from his records; and he be
given restitution of all pay and benefits he forfeited. The Board found
insufficient evidence of an error or injustice and denied the application.
For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the
application, and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see
the Third Addendum to Record of Proceedings at Exhibit DD.
In an application, dated 11 July 2003, the applicant requests his RE code
be changed to allow his reenlistment and provides additional documentation.
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit EE.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:
AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that
the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence to indicate any error or
injustice occurred during his processing through the Disability Evaluation
System (DES), or that the RE code is incorrect. If he is attempting to get
his medical status changed for the purpose of entering into the Air Force
Reserve, he should address the issue with a Reserve recruiter so a waiver
may be pursued.
The AFPC/DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit FF.
AFPC/DPPAE recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that
the RE code accurately reflects the circumstances of his record at the time
of his discharge. Furthermore, a recruiter can waive the RE code as a
condition of enlistment.
The AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit GG.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:
Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the
applicant on 12 March 2004 for review and response within 30 days.
However, as of this date, this office has received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and the additional
documentation submitted by applicant, we are not persuaded that he has been
the victim of an error or an injustice. The medical evidence provided by
applicant is noted; however, it does not substantiate that at the time of
his 1989 discharge, he was fit for continued military service. We note the
Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) has evaluated applicant and awarded
him disability compensation for the same unfitting condition that resulted
in his medical discharge. Absent a showing the diagnosis of his condition
was in error or unjust or that his rights were violated during his
processing through the DES, we are of the opinion that applicant has failed
to provide sufficient evidence to warrant a change in his records.
Applicant also requested his total active service date and total Reserve
time be corrected; however, this portion of his request has been
administratively corrected. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the
contrary, we find no basis upon which to recommend favorable consideration
of his request.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the additional 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-
02377 in Executive Session on 13 July 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chair
Mr. Jackson A. Hauslein, Member
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit DD. Third Addendum to Record of Proceedings,
dated 16 Apr 01, w/atchs.
Exhibit EE. DD Form 149, dated 11 Jul 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit FF. Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 20 Oct 03.
Exhibit GG. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 26 Feb 04.
Exhibit HH. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Mar 04.
DAVID C. VAN GASBECK
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02368
However, several disabling conditions were deleted, without explanation and if they had been properly considered by the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) as required by law and regulation, he contends these additional unfitting conditions would have increased his total rating to be at least 30 percent and he would have been placed on the TDRL. The BCMR Medical Consultant concurs with the findings of the IPEB that the applicant’s conditions did not warrant a disability retirement or placement...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01418 INDEX CODE 110.02 100.06 xxxxxxxxxxx COUNSEL: No xxxxxxxxxxx HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The narrative reason on her DD Form 214 be changed from “Personality Disorder” to one that more accurately reflects her diagnosis and her military record reflect she is fit for military service. Since the...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01418 INDEX CODE 110.02 100.06 xxxxxxxxxxx COUNSEL: No xxxxxxxxxxx HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The narrative reason on her DD Form 214 be changed from “Personality Disorder” to one that more accurately reflects her diagnosis and her military record reflect she is fit for military service. Since the...
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on 21 Aug 02 for review and response. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
On 5 Sep 9 7 , the applicant provided documentation relating to her post-service activities and requested the Board reconsider her application (see Exhibit F). After reviewing the statements and accomplishments pertaining to her post-service conduct, and noting that she was issued an honorable discharge, we believe her RE code should be changed to \\RE 3A" in order that she may apply for enlistment in the Air Force Reserves. The following documentary evidence was considered: AFBCMR...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02554
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPD states the purpose of the disability evaluation system (DES) is to maintain a fit and vital force by separating or retiring members who are unable to perform the duties of their office, grade, rank or rating. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR STAFF EVALUATION: On 3 January 2003, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for...
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE states the RE code 4H "Serving suspended punishment pursuant to Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)" the applicant received is correct (Exhibit D). However, at the time of separation he was serving a suspended punishment under the provisions of Article 15. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Applicant did not provide a rebuttal by the suspense date and subsequently officials in the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force approved the findings of the previous two boards and directed the applicant’s discharge with severance pay and a 10 percent disability rating. This code was correct at the time of his discharge.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02903
AFBCMR BC-2003-02903 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: Having carefully reviewed this application, we agree with the recommendation of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has been the victim of either an error or an injustice. Therefore, under the authority delegated in AFI 36- 2603, the applicant's records will be corrected as set forth in the accompanying Memorandum for the Chief of Staff...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01357 INDEX CODE: 110.00 APPLICANT COUNSEL: None SSN HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code and narrative reason for separation be changed to allow her to enlist in the Army. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE states the RE code the...