Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002274
Original file (0002274.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  00-02274
            INDEX CODE:  108.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


Applicant  requests  that  his  disability  discharge  with  entitlement  to
severance pay in September 1999 be set aside,  and  that  he  be  awarded  a
permanent disability retirement.  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
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  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 Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Mr.  Joseph  A.  Roj,  and  Mr.
Lawrence R. Leehy considered this application on 8 March 2001 in  accordance
with the provisions of Air Force  Instruction  36-2603,  and  the  governing
statute, 10, U.S.C. 1552.




                                     PATRICIA D. VESTAL
                                     Chair

Exhibits:

A.  Applicant's DD Form 149
B.  Available Master Personnel Records
C.  Advisory Opinions
D.  SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinions

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002012

    Original file (0002012.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 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 | 0000749

    Original file (0000749.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 | 0102303

    Original file (0102303.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 | 0102047

    Original file (0102047.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 | 0001713

    Original file (0001713.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 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 | 0101598

    Original file (0101598.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. PATRICIA D. VESTAL Panel Chair Exhibits: A.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0003010

    Original file (0003010.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 opinions appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been adequately rebutted by applicant.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 0001918

    Original file (0001918.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 | 0102317

    Original file (0102317.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). 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 | 0102274

    Original file (0102274.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). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.