RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO.: 01-01847
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
The applicant requests his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C be
upgraded. The applicant's submission is at Exhibit A.
Examiner’s Note: RE 2C defined is “Involuntarily separated with an
honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of
service.”
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
opinions 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 available at the time the application was filed.
Members of the Board Mr. Jackson A. Hauslein, Mr. Lawrence R. Leehy and Ms.
Mary C. Johnson considered this application on 10 October 2001, in
accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-2603 and the
governing statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552.
JACKSON A. HAUSLEIN
Panel Chair
Exhibits:
A. Applicant's DD Form 149 w/atch
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinions
D. AFBCMR Letter Forwarding Advisory Opinions
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion 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.
We noted that the appropriate Air Force offices indicated that the applicant’s character of service (under honorable conditions) honorable and RE code of 3C (First-term airman not yet considered under the Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP)) on his DD Form 214 were erroneous entries. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03997
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03997 INDEX NUMBER: 100.00, 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her narrative reason for separation and reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed. A copy of the AFDRB Hearing Record is attached at Exhibit C. The applicant’s records were administratively corrected on 12 Jul 00 to...
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). 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). 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). 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). Accordingly, applicant's request is 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). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.