RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03906
INDEX CODE: 110.02
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 24 JUN 2008
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C (involuntarily
separated under AFR 39-10, with an honorable discharge; or entry
level separation without characterization of service) be changed.
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
At the time, the events which resulted in his honorable discharge,
he was young; however, now he has grown as a person, learned from
his past mistakes, and moved on from those events. He has raised a
wonderful family, and worked hard as a correctional officer for the
last eight years.
In support of his appeal, applicant submitted a personal statement.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
___________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 21 Jul 80 for a
period of four years. He was progressively promoted to the rank of
airman first class with a date of rank of 13 Mar 81.
On or about 23 Feb 83, applicant failed to go at the time
prescribed to his appointed place of duty. For this offense, he
received Article 15 punishment. His punishment consisted of a
suspended reduction to the grade of airman until 3 Sep 83, and
21 days of correctional custody.
On 21 Mar 83, applicant was found in correctional custody facility
latrine with self-inflicted lacerations to both wrists.
On 28 Mar 83, the squadron section commander initiated
administrative discharge action against the applicant for his
conduct, military deportment, and duty performance not commensurate
with other airman of like age, grade, and length of service.
Applicant submitted statements in his own behalf. After base legal
review and on 5 Apr 83, the discharge authority approved the
discharge.
On 8 Apr 83, applicant was honorably discharged under the provision
of AFR 39-10, with an RE code of 2C. He was credited with 2 years,
8 months, and 18 days of service.
___________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPAE reviewed this application and recommended denial.
They found no evidence to support a different course of action
requested by the applicant, nor was there any evidence of error or
injustice found.
HQ AFPC/DPPAE’s complete evaluation, with attachments, is at
Exhibit C.
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant
on 16 Feb 07 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this
date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).
___________________________________________________________________
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 an error or injustice. Applicant’s
contentions are duly noted; however, we are not persuaded that he
has been the victim of an error or injustice. At the time members
are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code
predicated upon the quality of their service and the circumstances
of their separation. Applicant’s RE code of 2C accurately reflects
that he was involuntarily separated with an honorable
characterization of service and given the circumstances surrounding
his separation, we believe the RE code issued was in accordance
with the governing directives. Therefore, in the absence of
persuasive 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 issue 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-2006-03906 in Executive Session on 29 March 2007, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Mr. James L. Sommer, Member
Ms. Sharon B. Seymour, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, undated, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 19 Jan 07, w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 Feb 07.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04021
On 20 Nov 91, the discharge authority approved the recommended separation and directed that the applicant be issued an entry level separation. The applicant did not provide any evidence showing the information in the discharge case file was erroneous, his substantial rights were violated, or that his commanders abused their discretionary authority. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence...
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.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03841
He received records of counseling on six occasions (11 Aug 82, 5 and 6 Jan 83, 4 May 83, and 10 and 11 May 83) for failure to meet AFR 39-6 Responsibilities. After reviewing the evidence of record, the applicant’s overall quality of service and the events which precipitated his separation from the Air Force, we find no evidence to indicate that either the assigned separation code or the RE code are in error or unjust. ___________________________________________________________________ THE...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03481
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03481 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C (involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service) be changed to a code which will enable him to reenlist in another...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01490
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01490 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: DAV HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for discharge and reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C be changed to allow eligibility to enlist in the Air National Guard. The applicant’s request for a conditional waiver of an administrative discharge board...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01490 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: DAV HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for discharge and reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C be changed to allow eligibility to enlist in the Air National Guard. The applicant’s request for a conditional waiver of an administrative discharge board...
On 16 Apr 98, he was honorably discharged in the grade of airman (E-2) under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (unsatisfactory performance), with a separation code of “JHJ”. A copy of the AFDRB Hearing Record is appended at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Education and Training Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPAT, stated that after reviewing the applicant’s request, reconsideration of his separation code should be approved. RICHARD A....
On 31 Jul 81, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10 (Failed to Meet Physical Standards for Enlistment) with an honorable characterization of service in the grade of airman basic with an RE code of 2P (Separated under AFR 39-10 as marginal performer or to preserve good order and discipline, Basic Military Trainee (BMT) eliminees discharged due to erroneous enlistment, concealment of civilian convictions, and so forth) and a separation code of JFU (Failed to Meet...
The discharge complies with directives in effect at the time of his discharge. A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 10 May 1999. Applicant submitted a response and states that he is requesting the RE code and separation code be corrected, but not for the purpose of reenlisting in the Air Force.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03241
On 29 Aug 00, the applicant received notification that she was being recommended for discharge for erroneous enlistment. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicant’s submission, we are unpersuaded that the requested relief should be approved.