AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NO: 98-00402
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
E C 1 1 IQ98
Applicant requests that his general (under honorable conditions)
discharge be upgraded to honorable. Applicant's submission is at
Exhibit A.
.
I
denied applicant ' s
The Air Force Discharge Review Board
request on 26 January 1998.
In accordance with policy, the
application was forwarded to this Board for further consideration
(Exhibit C). The AFDRB brief was forwarded to the applicant for
review and response (Exhibit D). As of this date, no response
has been received by this office.
(AFDRB)
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 AFDRB brief 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 reasonably available at the time the
application was filed.
Members of the Board, Mrs. Barbara A. Westgate, Mr. Kenneth L.
Reinertson, and Ms. Ann L. Heidig considered this application on
19 November 1998, in accordance with the provisions of Air Force
Instruction 36-2603 and the governing statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552.
BARBARA A. WESTGATE
Panel Chair
Exhibits:
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. AFDRB Brief
D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding AFDRB Brief
The AFDRB brief 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 Board Mrs. Barbara A .
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant's request on 1 December 1995. The AFDRB brief 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 Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant's request on 16 October 1998. The AFDRB brief 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 Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant’s request on 24 June 1999. The AFDRB Brief 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 Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant's request on 16 June 1999. The AFDRB brief 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 Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant's request to have his discharge upgraded to general on 19 March 1980 (Exhibit B). The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Applicant'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...
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant's request for an upgraded discharge and RE code on 26 May 1999 (Exhibit C). The AFDRB Brief 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.
It appears that the responsible officials applied appropriate standards in effecting the separation, and we do not find persuasive evidence that pertinent regulations were violated or that applicant was not afforded all the rights to which entitled at the time of discharge. Under our broader mandate and after careful consideration of all the facts and circumstances of applicant's case, the majority of the Board is persuaded the applicant has been a productive member of society. Applicant's...
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 applicant did not identify any specific errors in the discharge processing nor provide facts that warrant an upgrade of his discharge he received. We also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency. Exhibit B.