RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-01114
INDEX NUMBER: 134.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
Applicant requests all derogatory information in his Air Force records
be removed. Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A.
On 13 December 2000, the AFBCMR considered applicant’s request that
his entry-level separation be upgraded to honorable, the reason for
separation be changed to “Convenience of the Government,” and his
reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to an RE Code 1. After
consideration of the available evidence, the Board found the discharge
was proper and in compliance with the governing regulation. However,
the Board determined there may have been mitigating circumstances that
affected the applicant’s performance while in basic training and,
therefore, recommended that the narrative reason for separation be
changed to “Secretarial Authority” and that his RE Code be changed to
“3K.” A copy of the Record of Proceedings is appended to applicant’s
request 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, within 30 days (Exhibit D). The
applicant’s response to the advisory opinion is at Exhibit E.
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 adequately 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 available at the time the application was filed.
Members of the Board, Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Mr. Steven A. Shaw,
and Ms. Barbara J. White-Olson, considered this application on 19 July
2001 in accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-
2603 and the governing statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552.
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Vice Chair
Exhibits:
A. Applicant's DD Form 149, w/atchs
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinion
D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
E. Applicant's Response
On 1 March 2000, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request that his discharge be upgraded to honorable and that the reason for discharge be changed. (See AFDRB Hearing Record at Exhibit C.) 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 and the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) Hearing Record were...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-00356 INDEX NUMBER: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO Applicant requests that his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code 2X and his separation code “KBK” be changed in order for him to reenlist in the Air Force Reserve. The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). ...
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). 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.
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). Applicant's response to the advisory opinions is at Exhibit E. 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 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). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.
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). 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 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). 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 available at the time the application was filed.
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). The facts and opinions stated in the advisory opinions appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant.
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, within 30 days (Exhibit D). 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.
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). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.