RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO.: 01-02091
INDEX CODE: 100.3
APPLICANT COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
The applicant requests his Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code of 2X be
upgraded. The 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, this office has received
no response.
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 took note of the applicant’s statement that his DD Form 214
reflects a RE code 2X because he was on the weight management program prior
to his separation. The applicant should be advised that the RE code 2X is
for “First term airman, second-term, or career airman considered but not
selected for reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program.” We
noted that an AF Form 418, Selective Reenlistment Program Consideration,
was prepared on 8 October 1999 in which his commander rendered him
ineligible for reenlistment, thus being the driving factor for the RE code
2X on his DD Form 214. The applicant acknowledged the foregoing on 15
October 1999 and elected not to appeal the nonselection. Thus, his
contention he was not notified of his reenlistment ineligibility is without
merit.
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 Ms. Peggy E. Gordon, Mr. John B. Hennessey, and Mrs.
Carolyn J. Watkins, considered this application on 1 November 2001, in
accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-2603 and the
governing statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552.
PEGGY E. GORDON
Panel Chair
Exhibits:
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinion
D. AFBCMR Letter Forwarding Advisory Opinion
However, if the decision is to grant the relief sought, applicant’s record should be corrected to reflect an RE code of 3K, “Reserved for use by HQ AFPC or the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) when no other reenlistment eligibility code applies or is appropriate.” A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 19 January 2001 a...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-01074
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 15 Jun 98 for review and response. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that the RE code issued at the time of his discharge was either in error or unjust. While the AF Form 418, denying...
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 15 Jun 98 for review and response. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that the RE code issued at the time of his discharge was either in error or unjust. While the AF Form 418, denying...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02091
On 24 Jun 04, the applicant was honorably discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Completion of Required Active Service), and furnished an RE code of 2X (First-term, second term, or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP)). ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPAE recommends the application be denied and states, in part, after a review of his military...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03258
On 13 August 2001, he was discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 for completion of required active service and was issued an honorable discharge. At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of their separation. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03393
At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of their separation. In regards to the applicant’s request for correction of his RE code, no documentation was provided to the Board, to show a record of satisfactory post service accomplishments. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...
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.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02585
She contends other personnel were involved but only she received a letter of reprimand (LOR) and was placed on the commander’s control roster. She responded with a letter to her squadron commander and eight character references - some of which provided insight on how she had been treated by her immediate supervisor. Letter of appeal to her commander.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00009
The applicants military personnel records indicate he enlisted in the Air Force Reserve on 24 Jan 14, for a period of three years. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPRs), which are attached at Exhibits C, D, E, and F. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPTOS recommends denial with respect to the applicants request for his lost time to be reinstated. A complete copy of the...
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.