RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02233
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
Applicant requests that her discharge be upgraded to honorable.
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 (Exhibit D).
As of this date, no response has been received by this office.
On 21 September 1994, the Board considered and denied applicant’s
request that the reason for her separation be changed so that she will
be entitled to unemployment compensation. (Exhibit E)
The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest
of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
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 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. Benedict A. Kausal, IV, Ms. Olga M. Crerar,
and Mr. Richard M. McCormick considered this application on 16 January
2001, in accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-
2603 and the governing statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552.
BENEDICT A. KAUSAL, IV
Panel Chair
Exhibits:
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinion
D. AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
E. Record of Proceedings, dated 21 Sep 94
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 97-03390 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: STEPHEN J. DUNN HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ RESUME OF CASE On 21 April 1998, the Board considered and denied applicant's 11 July 1997 application requesting that (1) her uncharacterized discharge be changed to a medical discharge; (2) a referral to a Physical Evaluation Board...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1997-03390
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 97-03390 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: STEPHEN J. DUNN HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ RESUME OF CASE On 21 April 1998, the Board considered and denied applicant's 11 July 1997 application requesting that (1) her uncharacterized discharge be changed to a medical discharge; (2) a referral to a Physical Evaluation Board...
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 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 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 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 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.
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.
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.
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant's request for upgrade of her discharge (Exhibit C). The AFDRB Brief was forwarded to the applicant f o r review and response (Exhibit D). The decision of the AFDRB appears to be based on the evidence of record and has 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). Applicant's response to the advisory opinions is at Exhibit E. We noted the applicant's request that the OSB prepared for consideration by the CY97C Central Lieutenant Colonel Board, which convened on 21 Jul 97, be amended in the "Assignment History" Section to reflect the duty title of I1Executive Officer, Conventional Operations...