RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01718
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His DD Form 214 be corrected to show a Reenlistment (RE) Code that
would allow reenlistment rather than a 2X, First-term, second-term, or
career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the
Selective Reenlistment Program.”.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His knowledge and mechanical abilities were considered an asset to his
section of the 3rd Component Maintenance Squadron at Elmendorf AFB,
AK. His knowledge of the F-15, the C-130 and his experience with
other airframes could still be considered an asset to other
maintenance squadrons. He feels he lost a part of himself when he was
discharged from the Air Force and would like to have the honor of
serving his country once again. He is a much more responsible person
now than when he was in the Air Force. At that time he was young and
did not know what he wanted to do with his life. He had no previous
responsibilities and didn’t care about a lot of things. He is older
now, married and raising a son. He works two jobs so his wife can
stay at home with their son. His experiences after leaving the Air
Force have made him a better person and, if permitted, his service
would be of the highest standards and expectations an airman should
display.
In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided a personal
statement and copies of letters of recommendation, Discharge Review
Board (DRB) paperwork, and his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or
Discharge from Active Duty.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 4 August 1999. He was
progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class with a date
of rank (DOR) of 4 December 2000. On 23 August 2002, his supervisor
initiated an AF Form 418, Selective Reenlistment Program
Consideration. He non-recommended him for continued service based on
his performance, both on and off duty, throughout his military career.
On 23 August 2002, his commander concurred with the non-
recommendation of his supervisor and also denied his reenlistment. He
acknowledged his commander’s intent on 30 September 2002 and opted to
not appeal his non-selection. He served for four years and was
honorably discharged on 3 August 2003 after completing his first full
term of service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPAE recommends denial. DPPAE stated after a review of his
personnel record, no error or injustice could be found to support the
change request. His commander as the authority on recommending non-
reenlistment or reenlistment, recommended he not be offered the
opportunity to reenlist.
DPPAE’s complete evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Applicant provides a lengthy statement rebutting the advisory wherein
he provides more detail to his original contentions.
Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________
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 find no evidence to indicate
that the reenlistment eligibility (RE) code he received from the Air
Force was anything but appropriate under the circumstances.
Additionally, he has not provided any evidence to show that he has
been denied the opportunity to reenter the military because of the RE
code he was assigned. We find no evidence of error in this case and
after thoroughly reviewing the documentation that has been submitted
in support of applicant's appeal, we do not believe he has suffered
from an injustice. 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-
2006-01718 in Executive Session on 5 September 2007, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. James W. Russell III, Panel Chair
Ms. Jan Mulligan, Member
Ms. Glenda H. Scheiner, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 3 May 07, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 15 May 07, w/atch.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 May 07.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, undated.
JAMES W. RUSSELL III
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01569
Applicant believes with all of the support documentation in his case, he is a very valuable asset to the Air Force In support of his appeal, applicant submitted a personal statement; extracts from his military personnel record, including copies of his performance reports and AF IMT 418s, along with several letters of character reference. Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. Applicant’s commander concurred and denied his reenlistment.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00825
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommended applicant’s request be denied. They also noted applicant did not submit any evidence or facts warranting a change to his separation code or reenlistment eligibility code. At the time a member is separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE Code predicated upon the quality of their service and the circumstances of their separation.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03000
She served 2 years, 2 months and 13 days of active service. The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE stated that the Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2C, “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service” is correct. However, after reviewing the applicant’s records, the Board believes the narrative reason for separation and her current RE code are somewhat harsh.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01413
A review of her EPR’s reflects that her promotion recommendation during two performance reporting periods was 2 – “Not recommended for promotion at this time” and a third EPR of 3 – “Consider.” On 22 December 1993, her commander concurred with the non-recommendation of her supervisor and denied her reenlistment. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01560
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01560 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code of 2X be removed from Item 27, Reenlistment Code, of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued on 10 August 1985. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02609
Applicant was discharged from the Air Force on 28 May 2004 under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, Completion of Active Service, with an honorable discharge. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. JAMES W. RUSSELL III Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2005-02609 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02492
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02492 INDEX CODE: 100.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 9 FEB 2009 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility code of 2X [first-term, second-term, or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP)] be...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01407
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01407 INDEX CODE: 133.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 28 AUGUST 2006 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS: A 23-month extension to his current enlistment and a Career Job Reservation (CJR) so that he may reenlist in the Air Force. In support of his request, the applicant submits a statement from...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC2006-03798
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03798 INDEX CODE: 112.10 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 16 JUNE 2008 ______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment (RE) code of “4F” be changed to a code that allows him to enlist in the US Coast Guard. Normally, members selected for reenlistment but failing to rank high enough...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02597
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02597 INDEX CODE: 110.00, 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. We do not believe that the circumstances surrounding her discharge warrant correction of her RE code to 1J as she requests, but agree with the Air Force office of primary responsibility that since the RE code of 3A is...