Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0101598
Original file (0101598.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  01-01598
            INDEX NUMBER:  133.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

Applicant requests that his enlistment grade of E-3 be changed to E-
5, since  he  held  the  E-5  grade  in  the  Air  National  Guard.
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, within  30 days
(Exhibit D).  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.   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 available at the time the  application  was
filed.

Members of the Board, Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Mr. Billy C.  Baxter,
and Mr. Mike Novel, considered this application on 23 October 2001,
in accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction  36-2603
and the governing statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552.



      PATRICIA D. VESTAL

      Panel Chair


Exhibits:
A.  Applicant's DD Form 149, dated 14 May 2000, w/atchs
B.  Available Master Personnel Records
C.  Advisory Opinion
D.  SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
E.  Applicant’s Response

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2000 | 0001751

    Original file (0001751.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    : 00-01751 INDEX CODE: 110.03 COUNSEL: DAV HEARING DESIRED: YES The applicant requests the narrative reason for separation on his DD Form 214 be changed and a new DD Form 256 be issued. The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Applicant's response to the advisory opinions are at Exhibit E. After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of...

  • 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 | 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 | 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 | 0002274

    Original file (0002274.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 | 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.