RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00579
INDEX CODE: 100.03, 100.06
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 29 August 2007
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 4E and separation program
designator (SPD) be changed so he can reenter the military.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He received an Article 15 that required that he maintain status on a
control roster for six months, starting 11 Feb 02. He did his
separation paperwork on 20 Jul 02, one month shy of the six months;
therefore, he received a RE code of 4E, even though his military
separation date with the United States Air Force was 5 Sep 02. He
also received a reduction in grade from E-4 to E-3 (new date of rank
11 Feb 02).
The applicant does not submit any documentation in support of the
appeal.
Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 6 May 98. He received
nonjudicial punishment in Feb 02 for failing to obey two different
officers’ orders and was reduced to the rank of airman first class.
According to the Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS), the
applicant was scheduled to separate on his normal Date of Separation
(DOS) of 5 May 02. His DOS of 5 May 02 was cancelled due to Stop
Loss. On 11 Jul 02, applicant was advised he was released from Stop
Loss and he requested to be separated effective 5 Sep 02. An AF Form
100, Request and Authorization for Separation, was issued discharging
him effective 5 Sep 02. He served four years and four months on
active duty. He was assigned RE code “4E” which denotes “Grade is
airman first class or below and airman completed 31 or more months (55
months for 6-year enlistees), if a first-term airman; or, grade is
airman first class or below and the airman is a second-term or career
airman.” He was assigned SPD code of “KBK” which denotes “Completion
of required active service.”
On 27 Mar 06, a letter was provided to the applicant to clarify the RE
code on his DD Form 214 and to ensure he understands the purpose of
this entry in his record and the consideration that must be made
before his RE code is changed.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPPRS 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. The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any
errors in his discharge processing. He provided no facts warranting a
change to his RE or SPD codes.
The DPPRS evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/JA recommends denial. They note a letter was sent to the
applicant on 27 Mar 06, informing him that the control roster was not
the cause of the reentry code and stated that the reentry code was
correct. As reflected in the advisory from DPPRS, the reentry code
and separation code are both correct.
The AFPC/JA evaluation is at Exhibit D.
A complete copy of the 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 21 Apr
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 not timely filed; however, it is in the
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
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
and adopt their rationale as the basis for the 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
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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2006-00579 in Executive Session on 25 May 2006, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Ms. Jan Mulligan, Member
Mr. James L. Sommer, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 22 Feb 06.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 31 Mar 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/JA, dated 13 Apr 06.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Apr 06.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00722
On 22 Mar 04, applicant applied to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The Board further concluded that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of the discharge. Exhibit B.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00921
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00921 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 27 SEPTEMBER 2007 __________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. __________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00853
On 24 Aug 90, the applicant submitted an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On 29 Nov 90, the AFDRB considered all the evidence of record and concluded that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and that applicant was provided full...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03142
However, on 27 Aug 01, the squadron commander reported to the Wing IG he was considering removing the applicant as NCOIC of the Hydraulics shop because he was inciting his personnel over the manning issue and continuing to complain about it outside the rating chain. The complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. AFPC/JA recommends the LOR administered to the applicant on 25 Mar 02, the EPR rendered on him closing 19 Jul 02, and the AF Form 418 be voided and removed from his...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03875
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005- 03875 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 23 JUNE 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01150
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01150 INDEX CODE: 100.00, 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 19 OCTOBER 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02418
As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). 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. ___________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02856
Therefore, he was not eligible for promotion to airman until that date. He is granted a waiver and is eligible to reenlist in the Regular Air Force. He is granted a waiver and is eligible to reenlist in the Regular Air Force.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00232
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. After consulting with military counsel, he waived his rights associated with an administrative discharge board hearing contingent upon his receipt of an honorable discharge. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2004-00232 in Executive Session on 1 June 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02807
Applicant was discharged from the Air Force on 7 Jun 85. He petitioned the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to upgrade his discharge to honorable in 1993. We find no evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we do not believe he has been the victim of an injustice.