AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AUG 1 4 1998
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET "MBER: 98-01031
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
Applicant requests his 27 March 1990 uncharacterized entry level
separation be changed to an honorable discharge. 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). 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 opinion appear to be based on the
evidence of record and have not been adequately rebutted by
applicant. There is no evidence in either the personnel records or
the medical records substantiating applicant's assertions of
physical mistreatment nor has any evidence been provided by the
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 availzle at the time the
application was filed.
Members of the Board, Messrs. Douglas J. Heady, Joseph G. Diamond,
and Henry Romo Jr., considered this application on 11 August 1998,
in accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-2603
and the governing statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552.
DOUGLAS J. H E ~ Y
Panel Chair
Exhibits:
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinion
D.
E. Applicant's Response
SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-02928 INDEX CODE: 121.03 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: Yes Applicant requests thirteen (13) days of leave be restored to his current leave balance. 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...
The AFBCMR previously considered and denied the applicant I s request that his records be corrected to reflect the addition of an Oak Leaf Cluster to the AM and DFC (see AFBCMR 80- 00947, with Exhibits A through C) . The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant I s requests and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the applicant's requests be denied (Exhibit E). Concerning his request for award of the China War Memorial Medal, the facts and opinions stated in...
The appropriate Air Force off ice evaluated applicant I 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). .” Another states “I know that I can reenlist rather than extend, but I have elected to execute this extension instead of reenlisting.” Both of these statements clearly indicate the applicant was aware of the reenlistment options.
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). The applicant voluntarily requested early separation from the Air Force for miscellaneous reasons and the request was approved for his separation to be effective 06 Aug 97.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). 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 records indicate member’s military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken.
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 facts and opinions stated in the advisory opinion appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant.
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). 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.
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). 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.