AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NO: 97-03432
COUNSEL: None
HEARING DESIRED: NO
Applicant requests the reenlistment eligibility (RE) code 2C
(Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry
level separation without characterization of service) be changed
so he can enlist in the reserves. Applicant's submission is at
Exhibit A.
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).
As of this date, no response has been received by this office.
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. The facts and
opinions stated in the advisory opinion appear to be based on the
evidence of record and have n o t been rebutted by applicant.
Absent persuasive evidence applicanc was denied rights tc which
entitled, appropriate reguiat-ons were not followed, 3 1-
appropriate standards were not applied, we find no basis tc
disturb the existing record.
Accordingly, applicant's reques: 1s denied.
The Board staff is directed tc inform applicant of this decision.
Applicant should also be informed that this decision is final ana
will only be reconsidered upon t h e presentation of new relevact
evidence which was not reasonabq available at the ~ ~ r n e ~ - " i e
application was filed.
Members of the Board Mr. LeRoy T. Baseman, Mr. Gregory H. Petkoff
and Mr. Patrick R. Wheeler considered this application on 2 July
1998 in accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction
36--2603 and the governing statute,
1 J . S . C .
:-',I
Exhibits :
Panel Chair
Therefore, the available documentation will be used this Record of Proceedings. The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant fclr review and response (Exhibit D I . Accordingly, applicant's request IS denied.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinicn tc the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit Z . The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for- review and response (Exhibit Dj. We note that applicant's request pertaining to Block 7A of his DD Form 214 has been corrected administratively; therefore, the only issue before this Board Is his r - e q i s s t that the 40LC be added to the MSM in Block 13.
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 offlce 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 f o r review and response (Exhibit D1. Applicant's response to the advisory opinion is at Exhibit E. After careful consideratior of applicant's request and the s-vzilab>e evidence ~5 z - e c c ~ c , ;hie 51nd insufficient evidence .=f efi-rax- 311 irilustice tc warranr-...
4 L AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECOR3 3F PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 97--03429 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING: NO The applicant requests that the award of the Vietnam Campaign Medal be added to his DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Cischarge. The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opin,on to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit T I . The advisory opinion...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). While on a tour, he stopped the bus for the members to see a herd of camels. This office is responsible for determining Air Force members’ eligibility and entitlement to awards and decorations, and your case was sent to us for review.
The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant fcz- xe'~iew and response (Exhibit D). After careful conslderatiop CT applicant's request and ti-le avallahle evldence of record, ~A-C find insufficient evidence of error or in7ustice to warrant zx-rectlve action. Accordingly, applicant's request 1s denied.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: - The AFBCMR Chief Medical Consultant reviewed this application and is of the opinion that no change In the records is warranted and the application should be d e n i m . *at Based on the medical evidence provided, the IPEB found her condition nad stabilized and recommended thar she be removed from the TDRL and permanently retired w i t h a 40% disability rating. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated Exhibit D .
Applicant? The appropriate Air Force off ices evaluated applicant I s request and provided advisory oplnions to the Board recommending the application be deniec (Exhibit C). The advisory opir2ions were forwarded to the applicart for review and response (Exhibit D1.
After his return tc the United States, he inquired about a request for the 30LC ana was promptly informed t h a t the Replacement Depot had no authority to initiate such a request and since he was being processed f o r release from active duty, there was no way such a request could be considered. It is no longer possible to ascertain whether or not the applicant was eligible for an additional decoratiorA for aerial achievements. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and...