Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 0002205
Original file (0002205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  00-02205
            INDEX NUMBER:  108.02

      XXXXXXXXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  None

      XXX-XX-XXXX      HEARING DESIRED:  No

Applicant requests that the findings  and  recommendations  of  the
Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) that she met and  earlier
concurred with be voided and that she be granted a Formal  Physical
Evaluation Board (FPEB)  hearing.   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, this office has received no response.

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 available at the time the  application  was
filed.

Members of the Board, Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Mr. George Franklin,
and  Mr.  Jackson  A.  Hauslein,  considered  this  application  on
9 November 2000 in accordance with  the  provisions  of  Air  Force
Instruction 36-2603 and the governing statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552.




                                    RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                    Panel Chair

Exhibits:
A.  Applicant's DD Form 149
B.  Available Master Personnel Records
C.  Advisory Opinion
D.  SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9900504

    Original file (9900504.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 | CY2001 | 0003319

    Original file (0003319.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). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9900985

    Original file (9900985.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 | 9900749

    Original file (9900749.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). 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 | 9900965

    Original file (9900965.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 | 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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9803135

    Original file (9803135.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 | CY2001 | 0102090

    Original file (0102090.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 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. RICHARD A. PETERSON Panel Chair Exhibits: A.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9803345

    Original file (9803345.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 | CY1999 | 9901220

    Original file (9901220.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). 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.