RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00004
INDEX NUMBER: 110.00
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None
XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: No
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 3 Jul 07
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed to one that will
allow him to serve in the military.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He is not saying his record is “unjust,” but he feels everyone
deserves a second chance. He is willing to do anything necessary in
order to serve his country.
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant entered active duty in the Air Force on 14 Jan 03. On
28 Aug 03, his squadron section commander (CCQ) notified him he was
recommending his discharge from the Air Force for minor disciplinary
infractions and also recommending his service be characterized as
General (under honorable conditions).
The reasons for the commander’s actions were:
a. Applicant received an Article 15 on 9 Jul 03 for
dereliction in the performance of his duties in that he willfully
failed to adhere to call to quarters, failed to refrain from riding in
a privately owned vehicle, failed to remain in the appropriate uniform
and failed to remain within the limits of his assigned base.
b. Applicant received a letter of reprimand (LOR) on 28 May
03 for falsifying an official form and lying to an NCO.
The applicant acknowledged receipt on the same day, waived his right
to military legal counsel, and waived his right to submit statements
in his behalf. The CCQ then recommended to the Group commander the
applicant be discharged for the reasons indicated above with service
characterized as General (under honorable conditions).
The Wing Staff Judge Advocate found the proposed discharge legally
sufficient on 8 Sep 03 and recommended the applicant be discharged as
indicated above and not be offered probation and rehabilitation. On
15 Sep 03, the Group commander directed the applicant be discharged
under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.49 with service
characterized as General (under honorable conditions).
The applicant was discharged on 16 Sep 03 with service characterized
as General (under honorable conditions). The applicant received an RE
code of “2B,” Separated with a general or under-other-than-honorable-
conditions (UOTHC) discharge. On 24 Jun 04, the applicant submitted
an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board requesting
upgrade of his General (under honorable conditions) discharge. On 12
Oct 04, the AFDRB approved an upgrade of the applicant’s character of
service to honorable. The applicant’s RE code changed to “2C,”
“Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge.”
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial of the applicant’s request. Based on the
documentation in the master personnel records, the discharge was
consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the
discharge regulation. The applicant did not submit any evidence or
identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge
processing and has not provided any facts warranting a change to his
RE code.
The 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
20 Jan 06 for review and comment within 30 days. To date, a response
has not been received.
_________________________________________________________________
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. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the
contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief
sought in 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 Docket Number BC-2006-
00004 in Executive Session on 2 March 2006, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Marilyn M. Thomas, Panel Chair
Mr. James L. Sommer, Member
Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Dec 05, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 13 Jan 06.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Jan 06.
MARILYN M. THOMAS
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03529
The following derogatory information was provided to the discharge authority as part of the applicant’s overall military service record, but was not considered as a basis for the administrative discharge or characterization of service: a. Applicant received a letter of counseling (LOC) on 18 Sep 03 for a duty related safety offense on 16 Sep 03. b. h. Applicant received a LOR on 29 Jan 03 for failure to report to duty.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01950
On 21 July 1989, the applicant submitted an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | bc-2006-02152
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He is currently serving with the Montana Army National Guard and would like to have his RE code upgraded so he can enlist in the Naval Reserve or even active service. The discharge authority concurred with the recommendations and directed his separation. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Aug 06.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03039
On 13 Apr 98, the applicant was discharged in the grade of airman basic for misconduct with a general characterization of service after 9 months and 18 days of active service. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF EVALUATION: The applicant provided a response, claiming he did not receive two separate Article 15s, that the 2 Jan 98 incident did not occur. After a thorough review...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00091
Applicant waived his right to a board hearing contingent upon him receiving a general discharge certificate. After careful consideration of the available evidence, the discharge appears to be in compliance with the governing Air Force Manual in effect at the time and we find no evidence to indicate the applicant was denied any rights to which entitled, or that his separation from the Air Force was inappropriate. Contrary to the applicant’s belief, his record of service was considered when...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03002
She followed his instructions because she did not want to hurt her chances of entering the Air Force. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial of 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01110
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01110 INDEX CODE: 100.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 3 Oct 06 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: It appears the applicant is requesting his records be corrected to reflect that he was released from active duty rather than discharged and that his reenlistment eligibility...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | bc-2006-01182
On 10 July 1998, the applicant was notified by his commander that he was recommending he be discharged from the Air Force for conditions that interferes with military service. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03201
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant’s request for an upgrade of his general discharge to honorable on 12 October 2001. A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states that he requested an upgrade in his discharge and received a letter from the Record Corrections Department saying he...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03201
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant’s request for an upgrade of his general discharge to honorable on 12 October 2001. A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states that he requested an upgrade in his discharge and received a letter from the Record Corrections Department saying he...