32 C.F.R. § 865.2
Board responsibilities
(a) Considering applications. The Board considers all individual applications properly brought before it. In appropriate cases, it directs correction of military records to remove an error or injustice, or recommends such correction.
(b) Recommending action. When an applicant alleges reprisal under the Military Whistleblowers Protection Act, 10 U.S.C. 1034, the Board may recommend to the Secretary of the Air Force that disciplinary or administrative action be taken against those responsible for the reprisal.
(c) Deciding cases. The Board normally decides cases on the evidence of the record. It is not an investigative body. However, the Board may, in its discretion, hold a hearing or call for additional evidence or opinions in any case.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1974–2026 · leading case: Dibble v. Fenimore, 545 F.3d 208 (2d Cir. 2008).
Dibble v. Fenimore, 545 F.3d 208 (2d Cir. 2008). “” 32 C.F.R. §§ 865.2 (a), 865.4(Z )(4); see also 10 U.”
Rempfer v. U.S. Dep't of Air Force Bd. for Corr. of Military Records, 538 F. Supp. 2d 200 (D.D.C. 2008). “” 32 C.F.R. § 865.2 (c). Although it is not an investigative body, the Board may, in its discretion, hold hearings or call for the submission of additional evidence.”
Millican v. United States, 744 F. Supp. 2d 296 (D.D.C. 2010). “Pursuant to 32 C.F.R. § 865.2 (c), the AFBCMR solicited several advisory opinions before making its decision.”
Reeder v. James, 121 F. Supp. 3d 1 (D.D.C. 2015). “” 32 C.F.R. § 865.2 (c). Thus, as the Secretary has argued, Reeder is not entitled to a do-over of the Article 15 process or to obtain a “new decision.”
Bell v. United States, 32 Fed. Cl. 259 (Fed. Cl. 1994). “See 32 C.F.R. § 865.2 (“The Board consists of civilians of the executive part of the Department of the Air Force in such number, not less than three, as may be appointed by the Secretary of the Air Force.”
Thomas Coleman v. Frank Kendall, III (D.C. Cir. 2025). “” 32 C.F.R. § 865.2 (a); id. § 865.4(c). “The Board acts for the Secretary of the Air Force and its decision is final when it .”
Bailey v. United States (Fed. Cl. 2019). “” 32 C.F.R § 865.2(a); AFI 36-2603, ¶ 2.1. An applicant must submit his or her application within three years after the error or injustice was discovered or should have been discovered; however, the board may excuse an untimely filing in the interests of justice.”
Annicelli v. Barrett (D.D.C. 2022). “The Board is not itself an investigative body, but considers applications based primarily on the evidence of record, 32 C.F.R. § 865.2 (c), though it may receive additional information from an Air Force organization or official, id.”
Reiter v. Kendall III (M.D. Tenn. 2025). “) He relies on 32 C.F.R. § 865.2 (c), which states that the Correction Board “may, in its discretion, hold a hearing or call for additional evidence or opinions in any case.”
Reiter v. Kendall III (M.D. Tenn. 2025). “See 32 C.F.R. § 865.2 (“The Board…is not an investigative body” and “the Board may, in its discretion…call for additional evidence or opinions in any case.”
Teacher (D. Maryland 2026). “See 32 C.F.R. §§ 865.2 (c), 865.4(a)(1). As Teacher has acknowledged, the AFBCMR may rely on such opinions to supply the reasoning for its conclusions.”
Yonan v. Seamans, 380 F. Supp. 505 (N.D. Ill. 1974). “32 C.F.R. § 865.2 (b). Although applications for corrections are to be filed within three years of the alleged error or injustice, and it appears that that time period has expired in this case, the Board is given discretion to excuse untimely failures to file.”
— 32 C.F.R. § 865.2(a) — 1 case
Bailey v. United States (Fed. Cl. 2019). “” 32 C.F.R § 865.2(a); AFI 36-2603, ¶ 2.1. An applicant must submit his or her application within three years after the error or injustice was discovered or should have been discovered; however, the board may excuse an untimely filing in the interests of justice.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.