Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0101033
Original file (0101033.doc) Auto-classification: Denied




                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  01-01033
            INDEX NUMBER:  110.02

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

Applicant  requests  that  his   narrative   reason   for   separation
(Unsuitable  -  Personality  Disorder-  Evaluation  Officer)  and  his
reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed.  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, within 30 days (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 opinions 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 applicant's case is adequately documented  and  it  has  not  been
shown  that  a  personal  appearance  with  or  without  counsel  will
materially  add  to  our  understanding  of   the   issues   involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

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 available at the time the application was filed.



Members of the Board, Mr. Patrick R. Wheeler, Ms.  Martha  Maust,  and
Ms. Dorothy P. Loeb, considered this application on 26 July
2001, in accordance with the provisions of Air Force  Instruction  36-
2603 and the governing statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552.




      PATRICK R. WHEELER

      Panel Chair


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

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 0001802

    Original file (0001802.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 opinions appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been adequately rebutted by applicant.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0101996

    Original file (0101996.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 | CY2000 | 0000251

    Original file (0000251.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 | CY2001 | 9902510

    Original file (9902510.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). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied. Members of the Board Mr. Patrick R. Wheeler, Mr. Lawrence R. Leehy, and Ms. Marilyn Thomas considered this application on 18 April 2001 in accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-2603, and the governing statute, 10, U.S.C.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0003147

    Original file (0003147.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). Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0100894

    Original file (0100894.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 | CY2000 | 0002516

    Original file (0002516.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 14 Dec 87, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request for upgrade of her general discharge to honorable and change of her reenlistment (RE) code. The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Applicant's response to the advisory opinion is at Exhibit E. After careful consideration of applicant's request and the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002343

    Original file (0002343.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided the 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). 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 | 0100025

    Original file (0100025.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 | 0101337

    Original file (0101337.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.