Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-01940
Original file (BC-2006-01940.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-01940
            INDEX CODE:  110.02

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Block 26, Reenlistment Eligibility, of his  NGB  Form  22,  Report  of
Separation and Record of  Service,  be  changed  to  read  “Eligible”,
rather than “Ineligible.”

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was told he could reenlist upon waiting for six  months  after  his
discharge.  He would like to be eligible to reenlist.

In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided copies of his NGB
Form 22 and his discharge order.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted  in  the  Kansas  Air  National  Guard  (KSANG)  on
14 August 2002 in the grade of airman first  class.   On  11 September
2003, his commander notified him of his intent to  discharge  him  for
Entry Level Performance & Conduct for his inability to complete  Basic
Military Training (BMT) due to a medical  condition.   On  6  November
2003, he was discharged with an  Entry  Level  Separation  as  he  had
served less than six months of active duty.

Examiner’s Note: Applicant was separated in accordance  with  AFI  36-
3209, Separation and Retirement Procedures for Air National Guard  and
Air Force Reserve Members, paragraph 3.16.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

None provided.

_________________________________________________________________

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
including his uncorroborated statement he was told he  could  reenlist
after six months; however, the discharge appears to be  in  compliance
with the governing AFI and we find no evidence to  indicate  that  his
separation from the Air Force was inappropriate.  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-
2006-01940 in Executive Session on 18 July 2007, under the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
      Ms. Barbara R. Murray, Member
      Mr. Richard K. Hartley, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 18 May 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02719

    Original file (BC-2005-02719.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 27 December 1983, he was honorably discharged from the Maryland Air National Guard for Expiration Term of Service (ETS) after having served for 16 years and 6 months. After a review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we are not persuaded that his uncorroborated assertion he was discharged for being six pounds overweight, in and by itself, sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air National Guard. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Mar 06.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02395

    Original file (BC-2002-02395.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s NGB Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of Service, reflects that he received a general discharge on 31 May 2000 under the provisions of AFI 36-3209, para 3.21.3.2 (Misconduct - Drug Abuse). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ANG/DPFP recommends denial. 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 National Guard...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2002-02395

    Original file (BC-2002-02395.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s NGB Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of Service, reflects that he received a general discharge on 31 May 2000 under the provisions of AFI 36-3209, para 3.21.3.2 (Misconduct - Drug Abuse). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ANG/DPFP recommends denial. 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 National Guard...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02983

    Original file (BC-2005-02983.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02983 INDEX CODE: 100.06 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C be changed to 1C allowing him the opportunity to reenlist. A1POF states he was discharged from the DEANG as a result of an Air Force Evaluation Report of his BMT experience and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03091

    Original file (BC-2003-03091.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03091 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to one that would enable him to reenlist. At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01371

    Original file (BC-2005-01371.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01371 INDEX CODE: 110.03 COUNSEL: HARRY KONST HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His record be corrected to reflect 20 years of active duty service, a subsequent active duty retirement, and a pilot bonus he would have received had he been selected for any one of several positions he had applied for but...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02632

    Original file (BC-2006-02632.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 4 June 1985. Between 4 June 1989 and 3 June 1992 his record indicates service with a Reserve component where he accumulated three satisfactory years of service towards a Reserve retirement – part of which the record shows was spent in the CAANG. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2005-03582-2

    Original file (BC-2005-03582-2.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS On 11 July 2006, the applicant's request to change his records was considered and denied by the Board. He does not know how otherwise to prove he is not taking any medication. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: After again reviewing this application and the evidence provided in...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01317

    Original file (BC-2005-01317.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005- 01317 INDEX CODE: 100.06, 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 21 OCTOBER 2006 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed from “3A” to “1” to permit reentry into the military without a waiver. On 15 Jan 05, applicant was honorably released from...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00688

    Original file (BC-2003-00688.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Air Force accepted him and he should receive an honorable discharge. On 26 Dec 02, the commander notified the applicant of his intent to recommend entry-level separation for erroneous enlistment based on the discovery of the pilonidal cyst. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPRS notes that had the Air Force known of the applicant’s EPTS pilonidal cyst, he would not have been allowed to enlist.