RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02483
INDEX CODE: A68.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
Applicant requests that his under other than honorable conditions
(UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to general. Applicant's submission is
at Exhibit A.
Limited documentation was available. Therefore, the facts surrounding
the applicant’s separation from the Air Force cannot be verified.
After careful consideration of applicant's request, we find
insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective
action. Based upon the presumption of regularity in the conduct of
governmental affairs and without evidence to the contrary, we must
assume that the applicant’s discharge was proper and in compliance
with the appropriate directives. In view of the lack of documentation
provided by the applicant pertaining to his post-service activities,
as well as the lack of information regarding the circumstances of his
separation from the service, we do not find the documentation
sufficient to warrant favorable action based on clemency.
Accordingly, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider this
application.
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. Terry A. Yonkers, Mr. Joseph A. Roj, and Mr.
Steven A. Shaw considered this application on 11 Oct 01 in accordance
with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-2603 and the governing
statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552.
TERRY A. YONKERS
Panel Chair
Exhibits:
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
B. Available Master Personnel Records
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 counsel for review and response (Exhibit D). Members of the Board Mr. Terry A. Yonkers, Mr. William H. Anderson, and Mr. Albert F. Lowas, Jr. considered this application on 22 Aug 01 in accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-2603 and the governing statute, 10 U.S.C.
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 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). 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 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). 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 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). 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.