RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00796
INDEX CODE: 100.06
COUNSEL: None
HEARING DESIRED: Yes
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 7 Sep 06
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed to one that allows
reenlistment.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He wants to rejoin the Air Force and serve his country again. While
in the service, he made some immature and stupid decisions regarding
his finances. He believes he can be a valuable asset and would not
jeopardize his career if he could serve again.
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted for a period of four years in the Regular Air
Force on 18 Nov 98 and was assigned to the 50th Security Forces
Squadron (50 SFS) at Schriever AFB, CO, as a Response Force Leader.
He received one Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) with an overall
rating of 4.
On 27 Jun 00, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for
failing to pay his government VISA account on 26 Jun 00, and being
delinquent on his monthly payment to the Army Air Force Exchange
Service on 27 Jun 00.
On 19 Jul 00, he received a Letter of Admonishment (LOA) for failing
to go to his appointed place of duty, i.e., mandatory financial
counseling.
On 29 Aug 00, the commander imposed Article 15 punishment on the
applicant for writing bad checks on 27 and 28 May 00, for a total of
$200.00 to DFAS-LIDSSN6671, and on 15 Jul 00, for $500.00 to Team
Honda. Punishment was forfeiture of $200.00 pay per month for two
months and reduction from airman first class to airman, which was
suspended until 28 Feb 01.
On 2 Oct 00, the commander vacated the suspended punishment due to the
applicant’s failure to take the proper clothing for his ergometry
test, on 18 Sep 00, and to go to his appointed place of duty on 26 Sep
00. The applicant was reduced to the grade of airman and forfeited
$200.00 pay for two months.
On 10 Oct 00, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to
recommend a general discharge for the above-mentioned offenses. On
11 Oct 00, the commander recommended a general discharge based on
these offenses. The commander did not recommend probation and
rehabilitation (P&R) and did recommend the applicant be barred from
the base, based on his negative effects on unit morale and discipline.
According to the commander’s recommendation letter, the applicant
acknowledged receipt of the notification letter and submitted
statements in his behalf on 10 Oct 00. However, the applicant’s
acknowledgement and statements are not included in his master
personnel records.
On 11 Oct 00, legal review found the case sufficient for discharge and
recommended the applicant be separated with a general characterization
without P&R. The discharge authority directed the applicant’s general
discharge for misconduct (minor disciplinary infractions).
The applicant was separated, on 18 Oct 00, with a general discharge in
the grade of airman after 1 year and 11 months of active service. He
received an RE code of 2B (Involuntarily separated with either an
honorable or general characterization of service).
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPRS indicates 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 does not submit evidence or identify any errors or
injustices with the discharge processing. No change in his RE code or
character of service is warranted.
A complete copy of the 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 25 Mar 05 for review and comment within 30 days. 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 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. The applicant’s contentions
are duly noted; however, we are not persuaded his RE code should be
changed. At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they
are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service
and circumstances of their separation. After a thorough review of the
evidence of record, we believe that, given the circumstances
surrounding the applicant’s separation, the RE code issued was in
accordance with the appropriate directives. The applicant has not
demonstrated to our satisfaction that the basis for his discharge, the
characterization of his service, and the resultant RE code were
unwarranted. Therefore, we find no basis upon which to recommend
favorable action on this application.
4. The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will
materially add to our understanding of the issue(s) involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
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 28 June 2005 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Cathlynn B. Sparks, Panel Chair
Mr. Albert C. Ellett, Member
Mr. Michael J. Novel, Member
The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2005-00796 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 2 Mar 05.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 22 Mar 05.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Mar 05.
CATHLYNN B. SPARKS
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-1996-03199A
A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit E (with Exhibits A through D). By application, dated 7 Feb 05, the applicant requests that his RE code of 2X be changed to one that would allow him to reenlist in the Air Force Reserve. Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit H. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: In an earlier finding, we determined that there was insufficient evidence to...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00056
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00056 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 8 May 2006 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. They concluded that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03236
On 21 June 2001, applicant submitted an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his under other than honorable conditions discharge to be upgraded to honorable. The AFDRB considered all the evidence of record and concluded that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. ...
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 | CY2006 | BC-2005-03781
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-03781 INDEX CODE: 106.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 17 Jun 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 1963 general discharge be changed to honorable. On 10 May 63, the applicant was discharged in the grade of airman basic with a general characterization of service...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02890
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 23 Jul 97 and was assigned to Keesler AFB, MS. On 19 Mar 98, he was notified of his commander’s intention to recommend discharge for minor disciplinary infractions with a general characterization. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPAE asserts the applicant’s RE code of “2C” [sic] (Involuntarily separated with an honorable...
On 24 Mar 98, the applicant voluntarily requested early separation from the Air Force to be effective 17 Apr 98 by submitting an AF Form 31 (Airman’s Request for Early Separation/Separation Based on Change in Service Obligation) to attend Wrightco Technologies Training Institute with a class start date of 27 Apr 98. His discharge complied with directives in effect at the time and the records indicate his military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken. After a thorough...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-01606
On 5 Apr 89, the applicant was notified by the commander that he was recommending the applicant be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10, paragraph 5-50.1, for drug abuse with service characterized as general. On 6 Jul 90, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge to honorable. Therefore, the Board recommends his discharge be upgraded to honorable and a majority of the Board recommends his RE...
On 5 Apr 89, the applicant was notified by the commander that he was recommending the applicant be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10, paragraph 5-50.1, for drug abuse with service characterized as general. On 6 Jul 90, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge to honorable. Therefore, the Board recommends his discharge be upgraded to honorable and a majority of the Board recommends his RE...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01954
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01954 INDEX NUMBER: 110.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry code of “2C,” entry-level separation without characterization of service, be changed to one that would allow his reentry into the Air Force. On 16 Apr 97, he was separated with an entry-level...