AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01673
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 23 NOV 06
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was and did rehabilitate.
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is attached at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force (RegAF) on 22 April
1977, as an airman basic (AB) for a period of four years.
On 15 December 1981, the applicant was notified of his commander’s
intention to recommend him for discharge under the provision of Air
Force Manual (AFM) 39-12, personal use of drugs. The reason for the
discharge action was:
On 26 October 1981, the applicant underwent a commander directed
urinalysis which tested positive for tetrahydrocannibol (THC
(marijuana)).
The commander advised the applicant of his right to submit statements
in his behalf and consult legal counsel, and if he so desired an
appointment would be made upon request.
On 15 December 1981, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the
notification letter waived his rights to legal counsel and to submit a
statement in his own behalf.
On 22 December 1981, the discharge authority approved the discharge
and directed the applicant be discharged with an honorable discharge.
Applicant’s performance report profile is listed below.
PERIOD ENDING OVERALL EVALUATION
13 Oct 78 9
31 May 79 9
31 May 80 9
28 Sep 80 9
21 Jun 81 9
14 Dec 81 6
On 29 December 1981, the applicant was honorably discharged from
active duty in the grade of sergeant (E-4), with an RE code of “2C,”
which indicates the applicant was separated under the provisions of
AFM 39-12. He served four years, eight months and eight days of
active duty service.
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of investigation,
Washington, D.C., indicated on the basis of the data furnished they
were unable to locate an arrest record (Exhibit C).
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS states based upon the documentation in the applicant’s
file, they believe his discharge was consistent with the procedural
and substantive requirements of the discharge regulations. Also,
the discharge was within the sound discretion of the discharge
authority. The applicant did not provide any evidence or identify
any errors or injustices that occurred in the processing of his
discharge to warrant a change in his RE code. Based on the
information and evidence provided they recommend the request be
denied.
A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 3
June 2005, for review and response. As of this date, no response has
been received by this office.
On 16 June 2005, the Board staff requested the applicant provide
documentation concerning his activities since leaving military
service. The applicant did not respond (Exhibit F).
_________________________________________________________________
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 of timely file.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence an of error or an injustice concerning the applicant’s
reenlistment eligibility (RE) code. The applicant’s contentions and
the documentation submitted in support of his request are duly noted;
however, it appears that the RE code which was issued at the time of
his separation accurately reflects the circumstances of his
separation. The applicant has not provided persuasive evidence
showing that the assigned code is in error or unjust or contrary to
the prevailing instruction. Therefore, we conclude there is no basis
upon which to recommend favorable action on his request to the change
RE code.
_________________________________________________________________
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-
2005-01673 in Executive Session on 14 July 2005 under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
Ms. Martha A. Maust, Member
Ms. Sharon B. Seymour, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 May 05, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. FBI Report.
Exhibit D. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 2 Jun 05.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Jun 05.
Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 16 Jun 05, w/atch.
KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
Panel Chair
A copy of the AFDRB Hearing Record is appended at Exhibit C. Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, WV, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Separations Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, stated that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation at the time of his discharge from...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02385
The evaluation officer recommended the applicant receive a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. (See Exhibit E) _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial. The DPPRS 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 23 Sep 2005, for review and comment...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00585
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005- 00585 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 21 AUGUST 2006 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The applicant offered a conditional waiver of the rights associated with an administrative discharge...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01032
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01032 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: AMERICAN LEGION HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 27 SEP 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. Based on the information and evidence provided they recommend the request be denied (Exhibit D). As...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02695
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02695 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 28 FEB 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). ...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00261
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPWB recommends denial of the applicant’s request that his rank of SSgt be restored. Additionally, the applicant has not provided any evidence to support his contentions of sexual discrimination. The applicant has provided no evidence with successfully disputes HQ AFPC/DPPPWB’s interpretation of the regulation or showing that he was unjustly treated in regards to his rank at the time of...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00629
On 3 Jun 81, an Evaluation Officer interviewed the applicant and recommended that the applicant be discharged from the Air Force with a general discharge. He chose not to appeal the commander's determination, which prevented a timely look by another commander at the issues he now raises over 22 years later. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03089
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-03089 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On 5 October 1982, the applicant received notification that he was being recommended for discharge due to his failure to perform assigned duties properly. The...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2005-01907
On 15 May 1989, the applicant failed to report to his place of duty, for which he received written counseling. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS states the applicant has not submitted any evidence nor identified any errors or injustices that occurred in the processing of his...
On 31 Jul 81, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10 (Failed to Meet Physical Standards for Enlistment) with an honorable characterization of service in the grade of airman basic with an RE code of 2P (Separated under AFR 39-10 as marginal performer or to preserve good order and discipline, Basic Military Trainee (BMT) eliminees discharged due to erroneous enlistment, concealment of civilian convictions, and so forth) and a separation code of JFU (Failed to Meet...