RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-01157
INDEX CODE: A60.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
Applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to
honorable. Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A.
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). As of this date, no response has been received by this
office.
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 decision of the AFDRB
appears to be based on the evidence of record and has 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 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. AFDRB Brief
D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding AFDRB Brief
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant's request on 15 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) 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) 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).
On 24 May 1988, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) .considered and denied applicant's request for upgrade of his bad conduct discharge to honorable. A copy of AFDRB Hearing Record is attached at Exhibit C. On 20 March 1998, the AFBCMR invited the' applicant to submit information pertaining to his activities since leaving the service (Exhibit D). careful consideration of .applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice...
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge to honorable on 19 January 1982 (Exhibit B). 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.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Separations Branch, Directorate of Personnel Program Management, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed this application and states that information reflected on his WD AGO Form 53-59, they find no evidence to indicate the applicant's discharge, over 48 years ago, was incorrect, an injustice occurred to the applicant, or 97- 03744 that the discharge did not comply with the discharge directive in effective at the time of his discharge. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-1994-00174-2
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-1994-00174 INDEX CODE: 110.02, 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general discharge be upgraded, her reason for separation (Misconduct - Pattern of Minor Disciplinary Infractions) and separation code be changed, and her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2B be changed. ...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (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. Applicant should also be informed that this decision is final and will only be reconsidered upon the presentation of new relevant evidence which was...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-1993-02122A
On 29 Sep 92, in a personal appearance, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied the applicant’s request for an honorable discharge and a changed reason for separation. He did not realize until years after his discharge that he was an alcoholic, making it impossible for him to drink in “moderation” as the Air Force had advised. Complete copies of his submissions, with attachments, are provided at Exhibit F. On 19 May 05, the AFBCMR Staff invited the applicant to submit...
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.