Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9801265
Original file (9801265.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  98-01265
            INDEX NUMBER:  100.03
            COUNSEL:  AMERICAN LEGION

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

Applicant requests that his Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code  of  2C
be changed.  (Examiner’s Note:  RE-2C denotes involuntarily  separated
under the provisions  of  AFR  39-10  with  an  honorable  discharge.)
Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A.

The facts surrounding his separation from the Air  Force  are  unknown
inasmuch as no military records were available.

Applicant’s DD Form 214, Certificate  of  Release  or  Discharge  from
Active Duty, reflects that his service characterization  was  upgraded
to honorable  by  the  Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Board  effective
20 December 1990 and that the  narrative  reason  for  separation  was
changed  from  Misconduct  -   Minor   Disciplinary   Infractions   to
Convenience of the Government.

After  careful  consideration  of  applicant's   request,   we   found
insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to  demonstrate  the
existence of probable error or injustice.  Based upon the  presumption
of regularity in the  conduct  of  governmental  affairs  and  without
evidence to the contrary, we must assume that the RE  Code  issued  in
conjunction with applicant’s involuntary separation was proper and  in
compliance with appropriate directives.  Therefore, we find  no  basis
upon which to favorably consider this application.

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 for a hearing is not favorably considered.

The Board staff is directed to  inform  applicant  of  this  decision.
Applicant should also be informed that this decision 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 the Board, Messrs. Henry Romo  Jr.,  Steven  A.  Shaw,  and
Timothy A. Beyland, considered this application on  22 April  1999  in
accordance with the provisions of Air Force  Instruction  36-2603  and
the governing statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552.




                                    HENRY ROMO JR.
                                    Panel Chair

Exhibits:
A.  Applicant's DD Form 149
B.  Available Master Personnel Records
C.  Advisory Opinion
D.  SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
E.  Counsel's Response

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-01265

    Original file (BC-1998-01265.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, reflects that his service characterization was upgraded to honorable by the Air Force Discharge Review Board effective 20 December 1990 and that the narrative reason for separation was changed from Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary Infractions to Convenience of the Government. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. Applicant should also be informed that this decision is final and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9801476

    Original file (9801476.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-01476 INDEX CODE: 100.06 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO Applicant requests that his records be corrected to reflect that at the time of his discharge, he was serving in the grade of sergeant, and his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C be changed. Accordingly, applicant's requests are denied. HENRY ROMO, JR. Panel Chair Exhibits: A.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0003302

    Original file (0003302.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). 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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9901087

    Original file (9901087.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-01087 INDEX CODE: 112.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed from 2P to a favorable code. Therefore, recommend his record be corrected accordingly. Exhibit B.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0101090

    Original file (0101090.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was not discharged because of the failure. Based on applicant’s failure in his CDC’s and no record of misconduct, the SJA recommended that the applicant be separated from the Air Force with an honorable discharge without probation and rehabilitation. We therefore agree with the recommendations of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden that he has suffered either an error or an injustice.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0101090

    Original file (0101090.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was not discharged because of the failure. Based on applicant’s failure in his CDC’s and no record of misconduct, the SJA recommended that the applicant be separated from the Air Force with an honorable discharge without probation and rehabilitation. We therefore agree with the recommendations of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden that he has suffered either an error or an injustice.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0003182

    Original file (0003182.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-03182 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) and separation codes be changed to allow her to enlist in the Coast Guard. Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A. A complete copy of the AFDRB brief is attached at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002965

    Original file (0002965.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02965 INDEX CODE: 110.00, 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C be changed to allow eligibility to reenter the Air Force. He requests additional information be provided concerning his discharge. A complete copy of this response is appended...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0003400

    Original file (0003400.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-03400 INDEX CODES: 100.06, 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for separation and reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief Medical Consultant, AFBCMR, reviewed this...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9803514

    Original file (9803514.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). 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.