RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 99-01237
INDEX CODE: 110-00, 112.00
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) denied applicant's
request on 3 September 1999. In accordance with policy, the
application was forwarded to this Board for further consideration
(Exhibit C). The decision of the AFDRB 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 facts and opinions stated
in the AFDRB Brief 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 reasonably available at the time the application was
filed.
Members of the Board Mr. Charles E. Bennett, Mr. Michael Barbino, and
Ms. Kathy Boockholdt considered this application on 6 January 2000 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. AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding AFDRB Brief
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 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 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...
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 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 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...
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.