AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE MATTER O F :
DOCKET NO: 97-03142
COUNSEL: None
HEARING DESIRED: Yes
Applicant requests his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code 2B by
changed to RE-1. Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A.
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant's
request on September 17, 1997. In accordance with policy, the
application was forwarded to this Board f o r further consideration
(Exhibit C)
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated
applicant I s request and provided ar- advisory opinion to the Board
recommending the application be dellied (Exhibit C ) . The advisory
opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response
(Exhibit D). As of this date, nc response has been received in
this office.
~
After careful consideration of applicant's request and the
available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of
error o r injustice to warrant cox-ective action. The facts and
opinions stated in the advisory opxion appear to be based on the
evidence of record and have not 3een rebutted by applicant.
Absent persuasive evidence applicax was denied rights to wklch
entitled, appropriate regulations were not followed, CY
appropriate standards were not zpplied, we find no basis tc
disturb the existing record.
Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.
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 f o r a hearing is not favorably considerec.
The Board staff is directed to inforx applicant of this decision.
Applicant should also be informed t h a t this decisiori is final and
will only be reconsidered upon the presentation of new relevant
evidence which was not reasonably available at the time the
application was filed.
Members of tne Board Mr. Thomas S . Markiewicz, Mr. Richard A.
Peterson and Mr. Loren S. Perlsteir Exsidered this application Gr
12 May 1998 in accordance with -,he provisions ~f Air Force
Instruction 36-2603 and the governiriz statute, 10 U . S . C . 1552.
,
/ Panel Chaii-
Zxhibits :
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
B . Available Master Personnel Reccrds
C. Advisory Opinions
D. AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
'4
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). He received an RE code of “2H: Participating in Track 4 or 5 of the Substance Abuse Reorientation and Treatment (SART) program for drugs, or has failed to complete Track 4.” Applicant’s military personnel records indicate he received a general discharge for “A Pattern of Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary Infractions.” This type of...
Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A. code be The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied. Based on the above, we recommend denial of applicant’s request for correction of RE code.
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). - After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action. Applicant did not identi@ any specific errors in the discharg&progessing nor provide facts which warrant a change in the discharge he received.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). The applicant was approved for retraining into AFSC lClXl and required 30 months retainability after class graduation date.
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 97-01826 (Case 2) COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO I Applicant requests that the narrative reason for separation be changed from marginal performer to convenience of the government; that his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2P be change to a 1; and that his separation code of JEM be changed. The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions...
Applicact's s u b x i s s i o ~ is at Exhibit Ti. The appropriate Air Force off;re evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory o p i n i o r . Appiicant's resporse to the advisory opinion is at Exhibit E. l2ursuar.t ts the 2 o a r d ' s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigatlon, Washington, D .
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The commander advised applicant that if his recommendation is approved, that his discharge would be described as entry level separation and that he would be ineligible for reenlistment in the Air Force. The records indicate member’s military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken.
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The commander advised applicant that if his recommendation is approved, that his discharge would be described as entry level separation and that he would be ineligible for reenlistment in the Air Force. The records indicate member’s military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken.
The appropriate Air Force o f f i c e evaluated applicarit ‘ s request ana provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit Z The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D ) . T r. 0 additional evaluation was forwarded to applicant f c r re-Jie+; ar,d comment (Exhibit G ’ i . Applicant’s response to the additional evaluation is at Exhibit H. The appropriate After careful consiaeratio~ cf applicant's r e q u e...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C ) . Unfortunately, the AF Form 41 8 denying applicant reenlistment is not on file in his military personnel record. However, if the decision is to grant the relief sought, applicant’s record should be corrected to reflect his RE code as “3K: Reserved for use by HQ AFPC or the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records...