RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01388
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
Applicant requests that his general (under honorable conditions) discharge
be upgraded to an honorable discharge. 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 D). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for
review and response (Exhibit E). As of this date, no response has been
received by this office.
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of investigation,
Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report which is attached at
Exhibit C.
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. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Mr. Joseph A. Roj, and Ms.
Patricia D. Vestal considered this application on 14 December 2000 in
accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-2603, and the
governing statute, 10, U.S.C. 1552.
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Panel Chair
Exhibits:
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinion
D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request 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). After careful consideration of applicant's...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request 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). The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision.
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, within 30 days (Exhibit D). The report was forwarded to the applicant for review and response, within 30 days (Exhibit F).
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 E). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response, within 30 days (Exhibit F). 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.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an initial and a revised advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were 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). 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). Accordingly, applicant's request is 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 opinion were 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). 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.