Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9803453
Original file (9803453.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  98-03453
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


Applicant requests that his discharge be upgraded  to  general,  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  the
applicant for review and response (Exhibit D).  As of  this  date,  no
response has been received by this office.

The application was not timely filed; however, it is in  the  interest
of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

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 Mr. Oscar A. Goldfarb, Mr. Lawrence R. Leehy, and
Mr. E. David Hoard considered this application on     8 June 1999,  in
accordance with the provisions of Air Force  Instruction  36-2603  and
the governing statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552.




                                    OSCAR A. GOLDFARB
                                    Panel Chair

Exhibits:

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

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802851

    Original file (9802851.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). 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 | CY1999 | 9900061

    Original file (9900061.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 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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9800200

    Original file (9800200.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 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 | 9900518

    Original file (9900518.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's requests 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 | CY1999 | 9900782

    Original file (9900782.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). 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 | 9803507

    Original file (9803507.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-03507 INDEX CODE: 110 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING: YES The deceased former service member’s widow, herein after known as applicant, requests that her deceased husband’s discharge be upgraded to honorable. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9900416

    Original file (9900416.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). The facts and opinions stated in the advisory opinions appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802830

    Original file (9802830.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    There are currently no provisions of law for officers promoted to the grades of lieutenant colonel and above, who are medically disqualified for worldwide duty, to retire in grade with less than three years satisfactory service. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that he should be retired from the U. S. Air Force Reserve in the higher grade of colonel. We therefore agree with the recommendations of the Air Force and adopt the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802895

    Original file (9802895.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The reasons applicant believes he has been the victim of an error and/or an injustice are contained in his complete submission, which is at Exhibit A. When members schedule leave in late September, they risk losing days if unable to take leave as planned due to unforeseen circumstances, such as a short-notice temporary duty (TDY). _________________________________________________________________ The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1993-03005A

    Original file (BC-1993-03005A.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 24 February 1999 for review and response within 30 days. However, as stated by the BCMR Medical Consultant, the applicant was appropriately evaluated and rated for the symptoms she presented at the time of discharge and at no time in the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) processing did she ever indicate any...