RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-03661
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His uncharacterized discharge be changed to an honorable discharge and
his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to one that would
permit reentry into the military.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
At the time of his discharge he was 21 years old and had learned his
father was suffering from terminal lung cancer. He felt his family
needed his help financially. He recently learned of his ineligibility
to reenlist when he tried to enlist in the Navy Reserve.
In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided a copy of his
request to the discharge review board (DRB) to change his discharge to
honorable.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Air Force on 15 October 1997. His commander
notified him on 27 January 1998 of his intent to discharge him based
on entry level performance or conduct as he had failed to make
satisfactory progress in a required training program. Specifically,
he failed Block II, Aircraft Systems A, examination twice with scores
of 30% and 42%. The minimum passing score was 70%. He acknowledged
receipt of the notification of intent to discharge on 27 January 1998
and waived his right to counsel and submit statements on his behalf.
The discharge authority approved the separation and directed the
applicant be separated with an uncharacterized entry-level separation
as he had served for less than six months. He was separated on 30
January 1998 after serving for 3 months and 16 days.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial. Based on the documentation on file,
the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the
discharge regulation. The discharge was within the discretion of the
discharge authority. DPPRS contends he provided no evidence of an
error or injustice that occurred during his discharge processing and
he provided no facts warranting a change to his character of service
or his RE code.
DPPRS’s complete 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 9
December 2005 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 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. While we noted the personal issues the applicant
faced at the time of his discharge, we are also cognizant of the fact
that he was discharged for twice failing a required Block test during
technical training school. The RE code and the uncharacterized
discharge appear to be in compliance with the governing AFI and we
find no evidence to indicate that the separation codes he received
from the Air Force were inappropriate. Therefore, based on the
available evidence of record, we find no basis upon which to favorably
consider 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-
2005-03661 in Executive Session on 16 February 2006, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Michael J. Maglio, Panel Chair
Ms. Donna Jonkoff, Member
Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 6 Apr 05, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 5 Dec 05.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Dec 05.
MICHAEL J. MAGLIO
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02536
He was separated from the Air Force on 4 Oct 05. 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 and adopt their rationale as the basis for the conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing, nor did he provide any facts...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02101
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02101 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 9 JANUARY 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be corrected so he can re-enter the Air Force. Additionally, he provided no facts warranting a change in his RE code or narrative reason for separation. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02211
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was separated from the Air Force and given an entry-level separation. On 29 January 1998, the applicant was involuntarily discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen (entry-level performance and conduct) with service uncharacterized and a 2C reenlistment eligibility (RE) code. He provided no facts warranting a change to his character of service or his...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00076
He provided no facts warranting a change to his character of service or his reenlistment eligibility code. In view of the foregoing, the Board recommends the applicant’s records be corrected by deleting the words “and conduct” from his narrative reason for separation. JOHN B. HENNESSEY Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2005-00076 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00624
On 13 July 2005, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airman (entry-level performance and conduct), with an uncharacterized entry-level separation. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected by deleting the words "and conduct" from Block 28 (Narrative Reason for...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02963
He was informed by his commander that there was no guarantee of the job he would receive, but he would most likely be assigned to Security Forces. On 19 Jul 05, he was academically eliminated from the Air Traffic Control course because he failed the Block II, Unit 9 test with a 52% score. Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 11 Oct 06.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01615
In support of his request, the applicant submits a personal letter. However, after reviewing the applicant’s request and the evidence of record, we find the narrative reason for his entry- level separation; i.e., entry-level performance and conduct, to be inappropriate. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected by deleting the words “and conduct”...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03367
________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 10 March 1981, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the age of 18 in the grade of airman basic for a period of 6 years. For this offense, she received a Letter of Counseling (LOC). We conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02688
He was unaware that the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) was available to upgrade his discharge. A legal review was conducted by the staff judge advocate who recommended the applicant be separated from the Air Force with a general discharge without probation and rehabilitation. Based on the information and evidence provided they recommend the request be denied.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2005-03867
Review of service medical records shows care for various conditions but there is no evidence that any were unfitting at the time of separation or warranted referral into the Disability Evaluation System. The complete Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 15 December 2006 for review and comment within 30...