RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-00259
INDEX CODE: 108:00
COUNSEL: DISABLED AMERICAN
VETERANS
HEARING DESIRED: NO
Applicant requests that his records be corrected to reflect that he
was medically retired with a disability rating of 100 percent.
Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A.
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 and counsel 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. 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 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. Charles E. Bennett, Mr. Gregory H. Petkoff,
and Mr. Charlie E. Williams, Jr. considered this application on 27 Jan
00 in accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-2603
and the governing statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552.
CHARLES E. BENNETT
Panel Chair
Exhibits:
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinions
D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinions
E. Applicant’s Response
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 Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant's request for upgrade of his general discharge and to change his RE code on 30 August 1999 (Exhibit C). The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request concerning the RE code and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit D). The decision of the AFDRB and the advisory opinion were forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit E).
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.
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.
: 108.08 HEARING DESIRED: NO Applicant requests that AF Form 356 (Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF Physical Evaluation Board), dated 22 June 1994, be corrected to reflect that his injury was caused by an “instrumentality of war” and that his disability rating be increased from 40 to 50 percent to coincide with his current Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) ratings. The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board...
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant's request on 3 September 1999. The decision of the AFDRB 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 Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request for upgrade of his discharge (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.
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). No such evidence is found in this record, and, therefore, the applicant’s request for a disability discharge cannot be granted. RECOMMENDATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that the applicant’s request for a medical disability discharge is not supported by evidence of records and his request should, therefore, be 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.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request concerning the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal 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...