RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02485
INDEX NUMBER: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
Applicant requests that her separation by reason of “Completion of
Required Active Service” be changed to “Resignation” of her
commission. 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, within 30 days (Exhibit D). 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. The facts and opinions stated
in the advisory opinion 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 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. Patrick R. Wheeler, Ms. Patricia D. Vestal,
and Mr. E. David Hoard, considered this application on 21 November
2000, in accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-
2603 and the governing statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552.
PATRICK R. WHEELER
Panel Chair
Exhibits:
A. Applicant's DD Form 149, dtd 30 Aug 00, w/atchs
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinion
D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
E. Applicant's Response
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...
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 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 adequately rebutted by applicant.
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The 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. PATRICK R. WHEELER Panel Chair Exhibits: 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, within 30 days (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 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 offices evaluated applicant's requests and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The 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. PATRICK R. WHEELER Panel Chair Exhibits: 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). 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 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, within 30 days (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). 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. Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.