Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9802339
Original file (9802339.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NUMBER:  98-02339 

COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

DEC  1 1 

Applicant  requests that  his  discharge  be  changed to honorable. 
Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A. 

The Air Force Discharge Review Board  (AFDRB) denied applicant's 
request  on  1  December  1995. 
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. 

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. WESTGAT($ 
Panel Chair 

Exhibits: 

A.  Applicant's DD Form 149 
B.  Available Master Personnel Records 
C.  AFDRB Brief 
D.  AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9800402

    Original file (9800402.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I denied applicant ' s The Air Force Discharge Review Board request on 26 January 1998. The AFDRB brief was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). (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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9802414

    Original file (9802414.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 .

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9801981

    Original file (9801981.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9901053

    Original file (9901053.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9901068

    Original file (9901068.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802546

    Original file (9802546.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9900876

    Original file (9900876.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802923

    Original file (9802923.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 | CY2000 | 9800510

    Original file (9800510.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9803511

    Original file (9803511.doc) Auto-classification: 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.