Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9901053
Original file (9901053.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:            DOCKET NUMBER:  99-01053
                       INDEX CODE:  110

                       COUNSEL:  NONE

                       HEARING:  NO


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

The Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Board  (AFDRB)  denied  applicant’s
request on 24 June 1999.  In accordance with policy,  the  application
was forwarded to this Board for  further  consideration  (Exhibit  C).
The AFDRB Brief was forwarded to the applicant for review and response
(Exhibit D).  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 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.  William  H.
Anderson, and Mr. Philip  Sheuerman  considered  this  application  ON
1 December 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.  Available Master Personnel Records
C.  AFDRB Brief
D.  AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding AFDRB Brief

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 | 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 | CY1999 | 9802546

    Original file (9802546.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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). 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | 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.