RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02127
INDEX CODE: 100.06
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 8 Jan 06
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reenlistment eligibility (RE) be changed from “Ineligible” to
“Eligible” so that he may reenlist in a branch of service of his
choosing.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
When he received his honorable discharge he was told that he would be
able reenlist in any branch of the service he chose. Nowhere in any
paper was he ever told or made to believe he would not be able to
reenlist.
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, his DD Form 214’s, Certificate
of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, his honorable discharge
certificate from the Georgia Air National Guar (GAANG), his National
Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of
Service, his discharge order, and point credit summary.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant began his military career in the Regular Army on 8 February
1979. He transferred to the Army Reserve and on 23 February 1993, he
was honorably discharged with over 14 years of service. He joined the
Air Force Reserve (AFR) in June 1999 and then the Navy Reserve in July
2000. In October 2002, he left the Navy Reserve and joined the
Georgia Air National Guard (GAANG) as a senior airman (Sra/E-4). On
19 August 2003, his commander notified him he was being recommended
for discharge for Misconduct, Commission of a Serious Offense. His
commander stated the applicant knowingly made false statements on a
Security Clearance Application, SF86 and a United States Air Force
(USAF) Drug and Alcohol Abuse Certificate, (AF Form 2030). While
applicant was a member of the US Navy Reserve (USNR) he had been
arrested for marijuana use and had received non-judicial punishment
under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). His
commander recommended immediate discharge with a general, under other
than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge. However, the Wing
commander recommended a conditional waiver, based on the convenience
of the GAANG as the applicant had served only one year with the GAANG,
and that all his previous discharges were honorable. Further, he was
to be immediately involuntarily discharged with an honorable discharge
for fraudulent entry and commission of a serious offense. Applicant
acknowledged receipt of the discharge action on 21 August 2003.
Consequently, he was honorably discharged on 13 December 2003 after
having served a total of 19 years, 10 months, and 14 days of combined
active and Reserve component service. He was discharged as a senior
airman with a reenlistment eligibility of “Ineligible.”
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
ANG/DPPI recommends denial. Regarding applicant’s contention he was
never told he would not be eligible for reenlistment, DPPI states he
signed a Conditional Waiver Statement acknowledging the terms of his
discharge to include the reenlistment eligibility entry of
“Ineligible.”
DPPI’s complete evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on
11 February 2005 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 timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice. We took notice of the
applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case;
however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force
office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis
for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an
error or injustice. It appears the applicant exchanged his
eligibility to reenlist for an honorable discharge. 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-
2004-02127 in Executive Session on 6 April 2005, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Cathlynn B. Sparks, Panel Chair
Mr. Terry L. Scott, Member
Mr. Patrick C. Daugherty, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Jul 04, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, ANG/DPPI, dated 8 Feb 05, w/atch.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Feb 05.
CATHLYNN B. SPARKS
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | bc-2004-02142
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was initially enlisted on 8 May 2003 in the higher grade of A1C as she enlisted in a critical Air Force Specialty (AFS). She was enlisted in the next lower grade and later found another airman who had enlisted under the same circumstances but at the higher grade. ______________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02127-2
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS On 6 April 2005, the applicant's original request was considered and denied by the Board. We carefully considered the applicant’s statements and documentation and while we consider the evidence provided in support of his request to be new and relevant, we do not find his argument so compelling as to alter our original decision. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2002-02537
A request to retire (Temporary Early Retirement Authority – TERA) should have been approved by the Air National Guard (ANG) and the U.S. Air Force. His application to retire early under TERA was disapproved and he subsequently accepted an SSB as a result of an involuntary RIF action. The DPPI statement “116th Wing commander elected to fund the new CM position and according to Georgia (ANG) the applicant did not apply for the position when the vacancy was announced.” He began terminal leave...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02801
AFBCMR BC-2003-02801 INDEX CODE: 131.05 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00273
On 17 July 2002, he wrote a letter to his wing commander asking that an MEB be accomplished, that he be returned to active duty and entered into the Disability Evaluation System (DES), that he be provided all back pay to the point he was released from active duty and that he remain on active duty until the disposition of his case was finalized. DPPI’s complete evaluation, with attachment is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2003-03958
He believes he should not have been demobilized, or if demobilized, he should have remained in an active duty status via mandays until such time as his medical case had been resolved. He is confused by SAF/MR’s denial of his extension request after correction of his profile to 4T in that he was injured while on Title 10 orders. ______________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03778
In accordance with the Date of Separation (DOS) Rollback Program, the applicant was honorably discharged on 27 July 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Completion of Required Active Service). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that since the applicant was discharged under the DOS Rollback Program and was serving on the Control Roster, his separation code of JBK...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-00317
DPPI’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reiterates his contention that he was not awarded service credit for his full-time experience on completion of his training. He addresses the DPPI contention that AFI 36-2005, Table 2.1, Note 8, states that applicants with less than 14 years service credit will be appointed in the grade of captain. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00326
His character of service was Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) and his reenlistment eligibility was recorded as “Ineligible.” _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ANG/DPPI recommends denial. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice warranting a change in his discharge and reenlisment eligibility. Vaughn E. Schlunz Panel Chair DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01588
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant contracted his enlistment in the --- Air National Guard (-- ANG) on 16 December 1994. On 17 November 1996, he was notified by letter of counseling (LOC) by his First Sergeant of an outstanding debt on his government Master Card in the amount of $1,495. Applicant’s complete response is attached at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES...