Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 0001751
Original file (0001751.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                 DOCKET NO.:  00-01751
                             INDEX CODE:  110.03


                             COUNSEL:  DAV


                             HEARING DESIRED:  YES


The applicant requests the narrative reason for separation on his DD Form
214 be changed and  a  new  DD  Form  256  be  issued.   The  applicant's
submission is at Exhibit A.


The appropriate Air  Force  offices  evaluated  applicant's  request  and
provided an 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 are 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  facts  and  opinions  stated  in  the
advisory opinions appear to be based on the evidence of record  and  have
not been adequately 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 applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not  been  shown
that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to
our understanding of the issue involved.  Therefore, the  request  for  a
hearing is not favorably considered.


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 available at the time the application was filed.


Members of the Board Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Ms. Barbara  J.  White-Olson
and Mr. Daniel F. Wenker, considered this application on 24 October 2000,
in accordance with the provisions of Air Force  Instruction  36-2603  and
the governing statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552.




                                        Patricia D. Vestal
                                                           Acting   Panel
      Chair


Exhibits:


A.  Applicant's DD Form 149
B.  Available Master Personnel Records
C.  Advisory Opinions
D.  AFBCMR Letter Forwarding Advisory Opinions
E.  Applicant's Response

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0003010

    Original file (0003010.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 opinions appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been adequately rebutted by applicant.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0102274

    Original file (0102274.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 | CY1999 | 9802296

    Original file (9802296.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 B). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9801019

    Original file (9801019.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 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 | BC-1998-01019

    Original file (BC-1998-01019.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 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 | 0000251

    Original file (0000251.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'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 | CY2000 | 0002516

    Original file (0002516.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 14 Dec 87, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request for upgrade of her general discharge to honorable and change of her reenlistment (RE) code. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9903128

    Original file (9903128.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 | 9903332

    Original file (9903332.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 | 9900639

    Original file (9900639.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.