Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9901004
Original file (9901004.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:                 DOCKET NO:  99-01004
                             INDEX CODE:  122.01

                                  COUNSEL:  DISABLED AMERICAN
                                                VETERANS (DVA)

                                  HEARING DESIRED:  NO


Applicant requests that the Line of Duty determination be changed from
“Not in Line of Duty - Due to Own Misconduct” to “In Line  of  Duty.”.
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 and counsel for review and response (Exhibit D).   Applicant
and Counsel'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  and  counsel.
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.  Richard  A.  Peterson,  Mr.  Gregory  W.
DenHerder, and Ms. Patricia D. Vestal considered this  application  on
18 January 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
E.  Applicant’s and Counsel’s Response

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0001267

    Original file (0001267.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, 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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802926

    Original file (9802926.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). A response from the applicant’s wife 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 | CY2002 | 0101796

    Original file (0101796.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 | 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 | 9802978

    Original file (9802978.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 and counsel 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 | CY2001 | 0003300

    Original file (0003300.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 | 0003372

    Original file (0003372.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 | 0002926

    Original file (0002926.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 and his counsel for review and response (Exhibit D). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9803494

    Original file (9803494.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 | 9803314

    Original file (9803314.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/counsel 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/counsel.