RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00164
INDEX CODE: 100.03, 100.05
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 21 Jul 07
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The reasons for his discharge were two Letters of Reprimand (LOR), one for
sleeping on duty and one for carrying tobacco in uniform. His complete
submission is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 21 Jun 05. On 16 Nov 05, he
was notified by his commander that he was recommending he be discharged
from the Air Force under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, for entry-level
performance and conduct, specifically, minor disciplinary infractions. The
basis for the recommendation were (1) on 14 Oct 05, he received an LOR for
having in his possession cigarettes, tobacco, and a lighter which he
carried in his BDU pocket during duty hours. Additionally, he was found
playing on a GameBoy during duty hours; (2) on 19 Oct 05, he received an
LOR for being asleep in the dayroom during duty hours. In addition to the
two LORs his commander noted the applicant had 10 negative AETC Form 341s,
Excellence/Discrepancy Reports in his record. He acknowledged receipt of
the notification and after consulting counsel he submitted statements in
his own behalf. The base legal office reviewed the recommendation and
found it legally sufficient. The discharge authority approved the
recommendation and directed he be separated with an uncharacterized entry-
level separation without probation and rehabilitation. He was separated on
6 Dec 05. He served 5 months and 16 days on active duty. He was assigned
RE code 2C which denotes "Involuntarily separated with an honorable
discharge; or entry-level separation without characterization of service".
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial. DPPRS states the discharge was consistent
with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge
regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. He
did not submit evidence or identify any errors in his discharge processing
and provided no facts warranting a change to his RE code. 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 27 Jan
06 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 warranting a change to his RE code. 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.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown
that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to
our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request for a
hearing is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
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-2006-
00164 in Executive Session on 16 Mar 06, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
Ms. LeLoy W. Cottrell, Member
Mr. Frederick R. Beaman III, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 Dec 05.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 23 Jan 06.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Jan 06.
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03270
In a legal review of the discharge case file dated 10 Oct 84, the staff judge advocate found the file was legally sufficient and recommended that the applicant be separated from the service with a general discharge. On 19 Aug 82, the applicant was discharged with a general under honorable conditions discharge. DPPRS states that based on the documentation on file in the applicant’s master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-01847
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01847 INDEX CODE: 136.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 19 Dec 07 ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be given either an active duty or Reserve retirement based on medical disability or cumulative years of service, or change his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code so he can enlist...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03103
The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 14 Feb 03 for review and comment within 30 days. After careful consideration of the applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we see no evidence of an error or injustice that would warrant a change in his RE code. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03103
The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 14 Feb 03 for review and comment within 30 days. After careful consideration of the applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we see no evidence of an error or injustice that would warrant a change in his RE code. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03501
On 9 July 1986, the applicant submitted an application to the Air Force Discharge Review board (AFDRB) requesting her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The board further concluded that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of the discharge. Based on the available evidence of record, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider this application.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00004
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). 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. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Jan 06.
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 | CY2007 | BC-2007-01862
________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The decision by the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to deny his request to upgrade his discharge to honorable was unjust. A legal review of the discharge case file by the staff judge advocate found the file legally sufficient and recommended the applicant be discharged with a general discharge without the opportunity for probation and rehabilitation. We took notice of the applicant's complete...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00055
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00055 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 9 Jul 07 ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Separation Program Designator (SPD) code be changed to a code that does not require repayment of the unearned portion of her Selective Reenlistment Bonus...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01836
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01836 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 12 DEC 2006 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code and narrative reason for separation be changed. The AFDRB considered all the evidence of record and concluded...