Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9602891
Original file (9602891.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  96-02891
            INDEX CODES:  100.06, 107.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


Applicant requests that his records be corrected to reflect  award  of
the Humanitarian Service Medal, and his reenlistment eligibility  (RE)
and separation codes  be  changed.   It  appears  that  the  remaining
portions   of   the   applicant’s   appeal   have    been    corrected
administratively.  Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A.

The appropriate Air Force office evaluated  applicant's  request  that
his records be corrected to reflect award of  the  Humanitarian  Medal
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.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the applicant clarified by letter  as
to the exact nature of the corrections to the record he  was  seeking,
which also included changing his RE and separation codes (Exhibit E).

After careful consideration of applicant's request that his records be
corrected to reflect award of the Humanitarian Service Medal  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 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 evidence of record reflects that the applicant  was  involuntarily
separated for drug abuse with a  general  discharge.   Therefore,  his
separation  and  RE  codes  accurately  reflect  the  reason  for  his
separation.  In view of the above, and in the absence of  evidence  to
the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists to recommend  favorable
action on the applicant’s request that his RE and separation codes  be
changed.

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 Ms. Patricia  J.  Zarodkiewicz,  Ms.  Dorothy  P.
Loeb, and Ms. Olga M. Crerar considered this application on  23 Mar 99
in accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-2603 and
the governing statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552.




                                    PATRICIA J. ZARODKIEWICZ
                                    Panel Chair

Exhibits:

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

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1996-02891

    Original file (BC-1996-02891.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request that his records be corrected to reflect award of the Humanitarian Medal 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). In view of the above, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists to recommend favorable action on the applicant’s request that his RE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802296

    Original file (9802296.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 B). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9801390

    Original file (9801390.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). 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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802506

    Original file (9802506.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). 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 | 9802060

    Original file (9802060.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). Accordingly, her records correctly showed her military training status.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9901176

    Original file (9901176.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). 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 | 9802761

    Original file (9802761.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). 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 | 9803242

    Original file (9803242.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force offices 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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802682

    Original file (9802682.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). Applicant'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 | CY1998 | 9802682

    Original file (9802682.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). Applicant'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.