RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-03560
CASE #2
INDEX CODE: 112.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He desires his RE code changed to have the opportunity to reenlist in the
service.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 23 September 1983 in the
grade of airman basic for a period of 4 years.
On 20 June 1986, the applicant was notified of his commander's intent to
initiate discharge action against him for a pattern of misconduct -
discreditable involvement with military authorities. The specific reasons
follow:
On 25 September 1984, he failed to repair for which he received a
Letter of Counseling (LOC).
On 29 August 1984, he failed to repair for which he received an LOC
dated 12 September 1984.
On 3 April 1985 he failed to repair for which he received an LOC.
On 25 June 1985 he failed to repair for which he received a Letter of
Reprimand (LOR) dated 12 July 1985.
On 9 September 1985, he failed to repair for which he received an LOR
dated 9 October 1985.
On 3 January 1986, he failed to repair for which he received an LOR
dated 3 January 1986.
On 7 February 1986, the applicant failed to repair for which he
received an Article 15 dated 13 February 1986. He was found guilty by his
commander who imposed the following punishment: a reduction in grade from
airman first class to airman, a forfeiture of $100.00 per month for one
month and ordered into correctional custody for 30 days; but the execution
of the portion of punishment which provided for reduction to the grade of
airman and forfeitures of $100.00 per month for one month was suspended
until 18 August 1986, at which time, unless the suspension was sooner
vacated, it would have been remitted without further action. The applicant
did not appeal the punishment. The Article 15 was filed in the applicant’s
Unfavorable Information File (UIF). AF Form 3212, Record of Supplementary
Action under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), dated
12 March 1986 indicates remission of correctional custody in excess of 30
days.
On 11, 21, 22, 24, and 25 April 1986, the applicant wrote bad checks
to the Beale AFB Exchange for which he received an LOR which was filed in
his UIF on 5 June 1986.
The commander indicated in his recommendation for discharge action that the
applicant had been continually unable to conform to basic standards of his
job and the regulations of the Air Force. He had been counseled by his
supervisors, first sergeant, and the commander on his performance, conduct,
and necessity to meet the standards expected of him with little or no
effect. The last effort towards rehabilitation as a result of Article 15
action was to put him in correctional custody. His ratings (commander’s
weekly evaluations) in comparison with others in correctional custody were
weak. The applicant completed 25 days in correctional custody. The
commander did not recommend probation and rehabilitation. Numerous and
varied efforts to rehabilitate the applicant failed completely, and there
was no indication further rehabilitative efforts would have been
successful.
The commander advised applicant of his right to consult legal counsel and
submit statements in his own behalf; or waive the above rights after
consulting with counsel.
After consulting with counsel, the applicant waived his right to submit
statements in his own behalf.
On 24 June 1986, the Staff Judge Advocate recommended the applicant be
administratively separated from the Air Force and furnished a general
(under honorable conditions) discharge, without probation and
rehabilitation.
On 30 June 1986, the convening authority approved the applicant’s general
(under honorable conditions) discharge.
The applicant was discharged on 2 July 1986, in the grade of airman first
class, with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions),
in accordance with AFR 39-10 (Misconduct - Pattern Discreditable
Involvement with Military or Civil Authorities). He completed 2 years, 9
months and 10 days of total active duty service. He received an RE code of
2B - Involuntarily separated under AFR 39-10, with a general or under-other-
than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge.
In an application to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records
(AFBCMR) dated 21 August 2001, the applicant requested his general (under
honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On
28 November 2001, the majority of the Board approved the applicant’s
request to upgrade his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to
honorable based on clemency.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial indicating that based on the documentation on
file in the master personnel records, 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 also did
not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred
in the discharge processing. Nor did he provide any facts warranting a
change to his RE code or narrative reason for separation.
The evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 16 December 2005, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to
the applicant for review and response 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 not timely filed; however, it is in the interest
of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
3. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of an injustice. The RE code issued at the time of separation
was in accordance with the applicable regulations. However, the Board
finds that based on the applicant’s desire to reenter the military, his RE
code should be changed to “4D.” This code provides the applicant the
opportunity to apply for enlistment in any branch of the service, requiring
a waiver. Whether or not he is successful will depend on the needs of the
service and our recommendation in no way guarantees that he will be allowed
to return to the Air Force or any branch of the service. In view of the
foregoing, we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected to the extent
indicated below.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating
to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that at the time of his discharge on 2
July 1986, he was issued a Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “4D.”
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2005-
03560 in Executive Session on 15 February 2006, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
Mr. Wallace F. Beard Jr., Member
Ms. Karen A. Holloman, Member
The Board voted to correct the records, as recommended. The following
documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, undated, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 12 Dec 05.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 Dec 05.
KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
Panel Chair
AFBCMR BC-2005-03560
MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF
Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force
Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section
1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to , be corrected to show that at the time of his discharge on 2
July 1986, he was issued a Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “4D.”
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01584
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 21 June 1983, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force in the grade of airman basic for a period of four (4) years. As of this date, no response has been received by this office. On 23 June 2004, the Board staff requested the applicant provide post- service documentation within 14 days (Exhibit F) and on 8 July 2004, the Board provided the applicant the opportunity to respond to the FBI...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04397
His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, indicates his narrative reason for separation as Reduction in Force and his RE code as 4D. The remaining relevant facts, extracted from the military personnel records, are contained in the evaluations from the Air Force offices of primary responsibility at Exhibits C, D, E, and F. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial of the applicants...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied. The evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel’s response to the evaluation is attached at Exhibit F. On 5 October 2001, the Board staff requested the applicant provide post- service documentation within thirty (30) days. Exhibit B.
AF | DRB | CY2006 | FD2005-00301
The Board concluded that the basis and characterization of the discharge received by the applicant were found to be appropriate. Issue 3: Punishment was excessive (reduction of two grades; two Article 15s, where the second was unnecessary; 30 days correction custody). For this misconduct, you received an Article 15 on 15 Dec 97.
AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0198
CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD02-0198 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity in this case on which to base an upgrade of discharge, The records indicated applicant had four Letters of Reprimand for failure to pay a traffic fine, failure to go and failure to pay just debt (twice). Recommend to 8 AF/CC that the respondent be separated with...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03895
The commander indicated in his recommendation for discharge action that before recommending the applicant for discharge he was counseled on different occasions, given four LORs and referred for financial counseling. On 8 February 2006, the Board staff requested the applicant provide post- service documentation within 20 days (Exhibit F). Although the applicant did not specifically request consideration based on clemency, we also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00912
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00912 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2B, “Separated with a general or under-other-than-honorable-conditions (UOTHC) discharge,” be changed. For these actions, she received an LOR, which was placed in her existing UIF. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03398
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03398 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge and his Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed. The commander indicated in his recommendation for discharge action that before...
AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD99-00424
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) AFSN/SSAN iP irneeninas: AIC Wien TYPE GEN PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW S : z NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL MEMBERS SITTING HON GEN UOTHC OTHER ISSUES INDEX NUMBER o EXHI Fase MT TRO TOT HE BOARD A92.37, A93.01, A94.05 A67.10 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 1 2 3 | LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL...
AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD01-00032
CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD01-00032 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable, change the Reason for discharge and change the RE Code. ISSUES: The applicant was discharged with a General Discharge for Misconduct — Minor Disciplinary Infractions. Attachment: Examiner's Brief FD-01-00032 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD (Former A1C) 1.