RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-02702
INDEX CODE: 100, 110
COUNSEL: None
HEARING DESIRED: No
Applicant requests that his general, under honorable conditions,
discharge be upgraded to honorable and that his reenlistment
eligibility (Re) code of 2B (Misconduct-Pattern of Minor Disciplinary
Infractions) be changed to allow him to reenlist. Applicant's
submission is at Exhibit A.
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI), Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative report
which is attached at Exhibit C.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request to
change his RE code and provided an advisory opinion to the Board
recommending the application be denied (Exhibit D). The advisory
opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response
(Exhibit E). Applicant's response to the advisory opinion is at
Exhibit F. The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant’s
request to upgrade his discharge and provided an advisory opinion to
the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit G). The
advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and
response (Exhibit H). 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 opinions appear to be based on the evidence of record
and have not been adequately 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 Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Mr. Grover L. Dunn, and
Mr. E. David Hoard considered this application on 6 May 1999 in
accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-2603, and
the governing statute, 10, U.S.C. 1552.
DAVID C. VAN GASBECK
Panel Chair
Exhibits:
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. FBI Report
D. Advisory Opinion
E. AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
F. Applicant's Response
G. Advisory Opinion
H. AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request to change his RE code and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit D). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit E). Applicant's...
Counsel’s response to the advisory opinions is at Exhibit F. 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. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. Members of the Board Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Mr. Grover L. Dunn, and Mr. E. David Hoard considered this application 10 May 1999 in accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction...
Counsel’s response to the advisory opinion is at Exhibit F. 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. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. Members of the Board Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Mr. Grover L. Dunn, and Mr. John E. Pettit considered this application on 9 September 1999 in accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction...
A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit F. On 25 September 2000, applicant submitted additional documentation and requested reconsideration. (Exhibit G). We also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency.
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.
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 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.
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 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 | CY2003 | BC-2003-02213
The applicant, while serving in the grade of Airman First Class, was separated from the Air Force under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) on 27 May 1977. His SPD reveals separation under the provisions of AFR 39-12, Section F, Request for Discharge in Lieu of Trial by Courts-Martial. Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, WV, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit...
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.