RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-03034
INDEX CODE: 110
COUNSEL: None
HEARING DESIRED: No
Applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to
honorable. Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A.
Applicant's military personnel records were destroyed by fire in 1973.
Therefore, the facts surrounding his separation from the Air Force
cannot be verified.
After careful consideration of applicant's request, we note that there
are no records to review and applicant has not provided documentation
revealing the circumstances of his discharge. Based on the
presumption of regularity in the conduct of government affairs and
without evidence to the contrary, we must assume that the applicant’s
discharge was proper and in compliance with appropriate directives.
Therefore, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider this
application.
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
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). 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.
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant's request on 24 September 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.
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...
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 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/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 Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request for upgrade of his discharge (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 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 reasonably available at the time the application was filed.
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 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). 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.