Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802546
Original file (9802546.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  98-02546
            INDEX CODE: 110.00

            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED: No


Applicant requests his undesirable discharge be upgraded  to  general  under
honorable conditions.  Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A.

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).  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.  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. John E. Pettit,  and  Mr.
Joseph A. Roj considered this application  on  8 April  1999  in  accordance
with the provisions of Air Force  Instruction  36-2603,  and  the  governing
statute, 10, U.S.C. 1552.



                                     BARBARA A. WESTGATE
                                     Panel Chair

Exhibits:

A.  Applicant's DD Form 149
B.  AFDRB Brief
C.  Advisory Opinion
D.  AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
E.  Applicant's Response

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | CY1998 | 9802339

    Original file (9802339.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

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