Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9900304
Original file (9900304.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                 DOCKET NO: 99-00304
                             INDEX CODE 100.00
                             COUNSEL: None

                             HEARING DESIRED: No

Applicant requests his DD Form 214 reflect the dates and places of his
overseas duty and the correct amount of  excess  leave.    Applicant's
submission is at Exhibit A.

Applicant's military personnel records were destroyed by fire in 1973.
All that is available is the DD Form 214 provided  by  the  applicant.
Therefore, the facts surrounding his service in  and  separation  from
the  Air  Force  cannot  be  verified.  The  appropriate  offices   of
responsibility evaluated applicant's requests  and  provided  advisory
opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied  (Exhibit
B).  The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for  review
and response (Exhibit C). As  of  this  date,  no  response  has  been
received by this office.

After careful consideration of applicant's request, we note that there
are no records to review and applicant has not provided  documentation
substantiating his claims.  The  facts  and  opinions  stated  in  the
advisory opinions appear to be based  on  the  available  evidence  of
record  and  have  not  been  rebutted  by  applicant.  Based  on  the
presumption of regularity in the conduct  of  government  affairs  and
without evidence to the contrary, we must assume  that  the  applicant
was not denied rights to which entitled, appropriate regulations  were
followed, and appropriate standards were applied. Therefore,  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. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Mr. Joseph A.  Roj  and
Ms. Dorothy P. Loeb considered this application on 26 October 1999  in
Executive Session in accordance  with  the  provisions  of  Air  Force
Instruction 36-2603, and the governing statute, 10, U.S.C. 1552.




                                       Panel Chair

Exhibits:
A.  Applicant's DD Form 149
B.  Advisory Opinions
C.  AFBCMR Letter Forwarding Advisory Opinions

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0101564

    Original file (0101564.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request concerning his RE code 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9800643

    Original file (9800643.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I " AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ' JUL 2 4 1998 IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 98-00643 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO Applicant requests that he be paid for accrued leave not verified on his DD Form 214. 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 applicant claims that he did not take this leave and did not receive payment...

  • 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 | CY2000 | 9900993

    Original file (9900993.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request concerning the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9901130

    Original file (9901130.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request in regard to the award of the Air Force Recognition Ribbon 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). 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0101409

    Original file (0101409.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 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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0100957

    Original file (0100957.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request concerning his training courses 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 | CY2000 | 0000086

    Original file (0000086.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was further advised that AFM 39-10 was the governing directive at the time of his discharge. The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). 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 | CY2001 | 0003197

    Original file (0003197.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 | CY2000 | 0000177

    Original file (0000177.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-00177 INDEX NUMBER: 108.09 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO Applicant requests that his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be corrected to show his grade was E-4, rather than E-3. 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...