RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS JUL 0 6 t9$,
IN THE PATTER OF:
DOCKET NO: 37-02281
COUNSEL: None
HEARING DESIRED: Yes
Applicant requests that his 1995 under-other-than-honorable-
conditions (UOTHC) discharge from the Air National Guard/Air
Force Reserve be upgraded to honorable. 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)
Applicant's response to the advisory opinion is at Zxhibit E.
a
After careful consideration of applicant's request and the
available evidence of record, including the investigative report,
we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant
corrective action. The facts and opinions stated 117 the advisory
opinion appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not
been sufficiently 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 documentation provided with this case was sufficient to give
the Board a clear understanding of the issues involved and a
personal appearance, with or without legal counsel, would not
have materially added to that 7Jnderstanding. Therefore, the
request f o r a hearins 1s not favorably considered.
The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of t h i s decision.
Applicant should also be informed that this decisioii is final and
will only be reconsidered upon the presentation 05 n e w relevant
evidence which was not reasonably available at zhe time the
application was filed.
Members of the Board Mr. LeRoy 7 . Baseman, M r . G r e g r o y H.
Petkof f , and Mr. Patyiclic H. Wheeler consldered t h i s appixatlon
on 2 Jxly 1998 in accordance with the provisions of A i r Force
Instruction 35-2603, z r ~ d the governing stptute,,) 10, U. S . C . 1552.
-
I
Panel Chaix-
Therefore, the available documentation will be used this Record of Proceedings. The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant fclr review and response (Exhibit D I . Accordingly, applicant's request IS denied.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request that his records be corrected to reflect award of the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit D). After careful consideration of applicant's request that his records be corrected to reflect award of the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to...
Funds allotted for payment of air mechanics are continued i n force u n t i l authorization for increased grades is received and conversion made i n compliance w i t h instructions above mechanics ratings t o noncommissioned grades is based on the fund8 allotted In t o the Air Corps f o r air mechanics grades within t h e present fiscal year. SUBJECT: TO : ,Appointment of' Air Mechanics t o Grades' Cammanding Generals, Army Air Forces, Army Ground Forces, Services of Supply, Armies, Army...
The appropriate Air Force o f f i c e evaluated applicarit ‘ s request ana provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit Z The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D ) . T r. 0 additional evaluation was forwarded to applicant f c r re-Jie+; ar,d comment (Exhibit G ’ i . Applicant’s response to the additional evaluation is at Exhibit H. The appropriate After careful consiaeratio~ cf applicant's r e q u e...
Applicact's s u b x i s s i o ~ is at Exhibit Ti. The appropriate Air Force off;re evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory o p i n i o r . Appiicant's resporse to the advisory opinion is at Exhibit E. l2ursuar.t ts the 2 o a r d ' s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigatlon, Washington, D .
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). The applicant was approved for retraining into AFSC lClXl and required 30 months retainability after class graduation date.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion t 3 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, .w.e 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 l . The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). _- T h e Board staff is directed to i n f c ~ r n applicant of chis decision.
The appropriate Air Force offlce 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 f o r review and response (Exhibit D1. Applicant's response to the advisory opinion is at Exhibit E. After careful consideratior of applicant's request and the s-vzilab>e evidence ~5 z - e c c ~ c , ;hie 51nd insufficient evidence .=f efi-rax- 311 irilustice tc warranr-...
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 97-01826 (Case 2) COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO I Applicant requests that the narrative reason for separation be changed from marginal performer to convenience of the government; that his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2P be change to a 1; and that his separation code of JEM be changed. The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions...