Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802038
Original file (9802038.doc) Auto-classification: Denied





                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  98-02038
            INDEX CODE:  110

            COUNSEL:  KENDRICK E. REID, II

            HEARING DESIRED:  Yes

Applicant  requests  that  his  1991  dismissal  be  upgraded  to   an
administrative  discharge  under  honorable  conditions.   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  counsel
for review and  response  (Exhibit  D).   Counsel’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  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 counsel.   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 applicant's case is adequately documented  and  it  has  not  been
shown  that  a  personal  appearance  with  or  without  counsel  will
materially  add  to  our  understanding  of   the   issues   involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

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 Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Mr. Gregory H.  Petkoff,
and Ms. Melinda J. Loftin considered this  application  on  4 November
1999 in accordance with the provisions of Air  Force  Instruction  36-
2603, and the governing statute, 10, U.S.C. 1552.



                                        RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                  Panel Chair
Exhibits:

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


Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 0002028

    Original file (0002028.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 | CY2001 | 0102090

    Original file (0102090.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 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 or injustice to warrant corrective action. RICHARD A. PETERSON Panel Chair Exhibits: A.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802926

    Original file (9802926.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). A response from the applicant’s wife 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 or injustice to warrant corrective action.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002466

    Original file (0002466.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, within 30 days (Exhibit D). The applicant’s response to the advisory opinions, with attachments, 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0003397

    Original file (0003397.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 should also be informed that this decision is final and will only be reconsidered upon the presentation of new relevant evidence which was not available at the time the application was filed.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9901004

    Original file (9901004.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 and counsel for review and response (Exhibit D). Applicant and Counsel'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 or injustice to warrant...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0001180

    Original file (0001180.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). 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 or injustice to warrant corrective action.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9900467

    Original file (9900467.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). 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 or injustice to warrant corrective action.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9900639

    Original file (9900639.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 opinion 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 | CY2001 | 0100952

    Original file (0100952.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided 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 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.