Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9901413
Original file (9901413.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  99-01413
            INDEX NUMBER:  100.03

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

Applicant requests that his Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code  of  2X
be changed to 4D.  (Examiner’s Note:  RE-2X denotes first-term, second-
term, or career airman considered but not  selected  for  reenlistment
under the Selective Reenlistment  Program.   RE-4D  denotes  grade  is
senior airman or sergeant, completed at least nine years Total  Active
Federal Military Service (TAFMS), but fewer than 16 years  TAFMS,  and
has not been selected for promotion to staff  sergeant.)   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 not been rebutted by applicant.  Absent  persuasive  evidence
applicant was denied rights to which entitled, appropriate regulations
were not followed, or appropriate standards were not applied, we  find
no basis to disturb the existing record.

Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.

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, Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Ms.  Dorothy  P.  Loeb,
and Mr. Joseph A. Roj, considered  this  application  on  28 September
1999, in accordance with the provisions of Air Force  Instruction  36-
2603 and the governing statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552.




                                    CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
                                    Panel Chair

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

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0100106

    Original file (0100106.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A letter was submitted requesting a copy of the IG Investigative report pertaining to the applicant and SMSgt F- ---. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 23 Mar 01 for review and response within 30 days. We find no evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the documentation that has been submitted in support of her appeal, we do...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03789

    Original file (BC-2002-03789.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    As such, he was given an RE code of 4D. (Exhibit C) _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 21 March 2003 for review and response within 30 days. The applicant’s assigned RE code of 4D accurately reflects that at the time of his separation he was serving in the grade of senior airman, he had at least nine years of active military service, and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02394

    Original file (BC-2005-02394.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of the application, the applicant submits his separation document, a letter from AFLSA/ADC, copies of support letters (3), and copies of documentation from his military personnel record. On 13 August 1997, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force Reserve and accepted for enlistment in the Regular Air Force in the grade of airman basic for a period of four years. The applicant was honorably discharged on 12 September 2001 for completion of required active service with a...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2003-02219

    Original file (BC-2003-02219.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s military personnel records reveal that, on 8 March 1997, the applicant was released from active duty and transferred to the Air Force Reserve under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (completion of active required service). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: HQ AFPC/DPPAOR states the applicant’s service dates and date of rank to the grade of E-4 are correct. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit F).

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03832

    Original file (BC-2002-03832.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03832 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The reenlistment eligibility (RE) code reflected on his DD Form 214 be changed to allow him to return to active duty. DPPAES further states the reenlistment eligibility code "4D" is the applicable code for a member whose grade is...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02616

    Original file (BC-2003-02616.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02616 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His separation and reenlistment codes be changed to allow him to enlist in the Air National Guard. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS states they believe the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9900134

    Original file (9900134.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-00134 INDEX CODE: 112.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His enlistment grade be changed from senior airman (E-4) to his previous grade of staff sergeant (E-5), with a date of rank of 1 Sep 95. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was miscounseled on his enlistment options for the Regular Air Force and as a result, he lost a stripe and active duty time. The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02968

    Original file (BC-2003-02968.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 27 Apr 03, she was released from active duty and transferred to the Air Force Reserve under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 and was issued an RE code of 2X [First-term, second-term, or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP)]. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9801528

    Original file (9801528.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-01528 INDEX CODE: 100 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of “2C” on the DD Form 214, “Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty,” be changed to “1J” to allow enlistment into the Hawaii Air National Guard. We have thoroughly reviewed the evidence...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02844

    Original file (BC-2002-02844.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant has provided no evidence of a clear error or injustice related to the nonjudicial punishment action. _________________________________________________________________ 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...