Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9701004
Original file (9701004.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NO:  97-01004 

HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

Applicant requests that his 1979 
to  a  disability  retirement. 
Exhibit A. 

voluntary separation be changed 
Applicant's  submission  is  at 

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  and  counsel  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 opinions  appear  to be  based  on 
the evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant or 
counsel.  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 Mr.  David  C.  Van  Gasbeck, Mr.  Richard A. 
Peterson,  and  Mr.  Kenneth  L.  Reinertson  considered  this 
application on 9 June 1998 in accordance with the provisions of 
Air  Force  Instruction  36-2603,  and  the  governing  statute,  10, 
U.S.C. 1552. 

Exhibits: 

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



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 0002039

    Original file (0002039.doc) Auto-classification: 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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802702

    Original file (9802702.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request to change his RE code and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit D). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit E). Applicant's...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9802702

    Original file (9802702.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request to change his RE code and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit D). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit E). Applicant's...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9803000

    Original file (9803000.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Counsel'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 facts and opinions stated in the advisory opinions appear to be based on the evidence of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9803314

    Original file (9803314.doc) Auto-classification: 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/counsel 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/counsel.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0003252

    Original file (0003252.doc) Auto-classification: 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 and counsel for review and response (Exhibit D). Counsel’s response is attached 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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802526

    Original file (9802526.doc) Auto-classification: 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/counsel for review and response (Exhibit D). Counsel'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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002045

    Original file (0002045.doc) Auto-classification: 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/counsel 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 counsel/applicant.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9801662

    Original file (9801662.doc) Auto-classification: 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). Counsel'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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802962

    Original file (9802962.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 98-02962 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: VFW HEARING DESIRED: NO Applicant requests that he be awarded the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) and Air Force Good Conduct Medal (AFGCM). The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request concerning the AFCM and AFGCM and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinion...