Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02909
Original file (BC-2005-02909.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                        DOCKET  NUMBER:   BC-2005-
02909
                                             INDEX CODE:  100.00

                                             COUNSEL:  NONE

                                             HEARING DESIRED:  NO



MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  25 MARCH 2007


___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code be changed from  “3A”  to  a
“1” to allow reentry into the active duty military.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

There is no error on her DD Form 214,  Certificate  of  Release  or
Discharge from Active Duty.  She wants her RE code changed so  that
she may reenter the active duty military.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 16  Sep  03,  for  a
period of six years in the grade of airman basic.

On 28 Sep  04,  applicant  voluntarily  submitted  an  AF  IMT  31,
Airman’s Request for Early Separation/Separation Based on Change in
Service Obligation, requesting separation  under  the  Air  Force’s
Force  Shaping  Program,  Phase  II.   The  applicant  offered  the
following reasons for her request:   (1)  The  Air  Force  was  not
providing the opportunities that she expected; (2) She would rather
go to school to get her health, movement, and science  degree;  (3)
She did not plan on making the Air Force a career, and  would  like
to get a jump start on her life as a civilian.  On 30 Sep  04,  the
section commander approved applicant’s request for separation.

Applicant was honorably released from active duty  and  transferred
to the Air Force Reserve on 16 Jan 05, in the grade of airman first
class,  under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-3208,  by   reason   of
miscellaneous/general reasons, and was issued  an  RE  Code  of  3A
(first-term airman who separates before completing  36  months  (60
months for a 6-year enlistee) on current enlistment and who has  no
known disqualifying  factors  or  ineligibility  conditions  except
grade, skill level and insufficient TAFMS).  She served 1  year,  4
months, and 1 day of active military service.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied and  states,  in
part, in accordance with AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment  in  the  United
States Air Force, Table 3.3, applicant’s  reenlistment  eligibility
code was established as 3A (first-term airman who separates  before
completing 36 months (60 months for a 6-year enlistee)  on  current
enlistment  and  who  has  no  known   disqualifying   factors   or
ineligibility conditions except grade, skill level and insufficient
TAFMS), which is correct.  The reenlistment eligibility code of  3A
made applicant ineligible for  immediate  reenlistment  (within  24
hours after separation), but eligible for prior service  enlistment
with an approved waiver, provided she is otherwise qualified.

Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records,
the separation was consistent with the procedural  and  substantive
requirements of  the  discharge  regulation.   The  separation  was
within the discretion of the  discharge  authority.   Additionally,
the applicant provided no evidence  or  identified  any  errors  or
injustices  that  occurred  in  the  separation  processing.    She
indicates in her application that there is no error on her DD  Form
214.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation, with  attachments,  is
at Exhibit C.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 7 Oct 05, a copy of the Air Force evaluation  was  forwarded  to
the applicant for review and comment within 30 days.   To  date,  a
reply has not been received by this office (Exhibit D).

___________________________________________________________________

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.   Applicant’s
contentions are duly noted; however, we are not persuaded that  the
applicant has been the victim of an error  or  injustice.   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  careful  review  of  the
available records, we find no evidence that the assigned code is in
error or contrary to the governing instruction.  Therefore, in  the
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which to
recommend favorable action on the applicant’s request.

___________________________________________________________________

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-2005-
02909  in  Executive  Session  on  10  November  2005,  under   the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
      Ms. Cheryl V. Jacobson, Member
      Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 Sep 05, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 3 Oct 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Oct 05.




                                   MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01317

    Original file (BC-2005-01317.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005- 01317 INDEX CODE: 100.06, 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 21 OCTOBER 2006 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed from “3A” to “1” to permit reentry into the military without a waiver. On 15 Jan 05, applicant was honorably released from...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03173

    Original file (BC-2003-03173.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03173 INDEX CODE: 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed and that her Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM) be added to her DD Form 214, Certificate of Discharge or Release from Active Duty. On 30 Aug 01, she was released from active duty...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01690

    Original file (BC-2005-01690.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s commander recommended she be discharged under the Force Shaping Program. At the time a member is separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE Code predicated upon the quality of their service and the circumstances of their separation. ___________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2005- 01690 in Executive Session on 10 November 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Mr. Michael...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02597

    Original file (BC-2007-02597.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02597 INDEX CODE: 110.00, 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. We do not believe that the circumstances surrounding her discharge warrant correction of her RE code to 1J as she requests, but agree with the Air Force office of primary responsibility that since the RE code of 3A is...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02754

    Original file (BC-2005-02754.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The following AF Forms 418, Selective Reenlistment/Noncommissioned Officer Status Consideration, were on file in the master personnel record. She received an RE code of 2Y “A second-term or career airman considered but not selected for NCO status, or had vacated NCO status under AFR 39-13.” The complete Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit D. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 7 Oct 05, copies of the Air Force...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00780

    Original file (BC-2006-00780.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    She did not receive any notice of the debt during the eight months after her separation from the Air Force. JA states the Air Force Shaping Program provided certain individuals with an opportunity to voluntarily opt out of their enlistments on the condition that they repay any bonuses received. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that the applicant should be given the relief requested.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03006

    Original file (BC-2005-03006.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He did not appear to have fully grasped the material and had a difficult time during the PC. At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and the circumstances of their separation. The applicant was unable to progress in technical training, first in the computer programming career field and then when he was reclassified in the telephone systems AFSC.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03941

    Original file (BC-2007-03941.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In a letter dated 17 Jan 08, the applicant was notified of a change to her RE code from 3A to 2Q (Personnel medically retired or discharged) and issued a DD Form 215, Correction to DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force and the BCMR Medical Consultant at Exhibits C, D and F,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04292

    Original file (BC-2010-04292.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04292 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) code of 3A, which denotes “First-term airman who separates before completing 36 months (60 months for 6-year enlistee) on current enlistment and who has no known disqualifying factors or ineligibility conditions except grade, skill...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00315

    Original file (BC 2014 00315.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ USAFA/PLEA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. A complete copy of the HQ USAFA/PLEA 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 15 Sep 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion...