RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 98-02158 (Case 2)
INDEX CODE: 126.00
APPLICANT COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
Applicant requests that the Article 15 he received in May 1997 be
expunged from his military records. 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 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 Ms. Cathlynn Sparks, Dr. Gerald B. Kauvar, and
Mr. George Franklin considered this application on 13 July 1999
accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-2603, and
the governing statute, 10, U.S.C. 1552.
CATHLYNN SPARKS
Panel Chair
Exhibits:
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinion
D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
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 office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The report was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit G). Available Master Personnel Records C. Advisory Opinion D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion E. AFBCMR Post Service Request F. FBI Report G. AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding FBI Report
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1997-00038
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). Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.
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). Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.
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.
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). 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 30 January 1 9 9 7 (Exhibit B). The AFDRB brief was forwarded to the applicant and applicant's counsel for review and response (Exhibit D). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03761
The applicant does not offer evidence in support of the claim as required by AFI 36-2603, Air Force for Correction of Military Records, and AFP 36-2607, Applicant's Guide to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR). The applicant did not participate in VEAP, therefore, does not qualify under the law to participate in VEAP or convert to the MGIB under the current statues. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00833
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommended denial and states that they are unable to find evidence of a recommendation for, or award of the DFC. Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Jun 04.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02285
___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: When he was notified in late 1999 to early 2000 that he needed to obtain or decline retainability, he informed the Military Personnel Flight (MPF) and signed a letter of intent that he would reenlist in early Jul 00 to receive the most of his SRB as possible. Members must have, obtain retainability, or decline to obtain retainability within 30 days of making their overseas returnee selection. We...