Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0101281
Original file (0101281.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:            DOCKET NO: 01-01281
                       INDEX CODE:  100.00

                             COUNSEL:  THE AMERICAN LEGION

                             HEARING DESIRED:  YES

Applicant requests that he be reinstated to  active  duty  at  his  home  of
record for the period 31 August 1994 to 1 March 1997, and  his  retired  pay
be adjusted accordingly.  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). The applicant’s response is at  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
opinions appear to be based on the evidence of  record  and  have  not  been
adequately 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 issue(s) 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. Edward H. Parker, Ms. Martha Maust,  and  Mr. James
W.  Russell  Jr.,  considered  this  application  on  31 January  2002,   in
accordance with the provisions of Air Force  Instruction  36-2603,  and  the
governing statute, 10, U.S.C. 1552.




                       EDWARD H. PARKER
                       Panel Chair


Exhibits:

A.  Applicant's DD Form 149, w/atchs
B.  Available Master Personnel Records
C.  Advisory Opinions
D.  AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinions
E.  Applicant's Response, w/atchs

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0101849

    Original file (0101849.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). 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. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0101271

    Original file (0101271.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). 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 | 0100267

    Original file (0100267.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response, within 30 days (Exhibit D). The counsel’s response to the advisory opinions 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. TEDDY L. HOUSTON Panel Chair Exhibits: A.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0101958

    Original file (0101958.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. JOSEPH G. DIAMOND Panel Chair Exhibits: A.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0101953

    Original file (0101953.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 | CY2002 | 0101758

    Original file (0101758.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 rebutted by applicant.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0102133

    Original file (0102133.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 | CY2002 | 0102223

    Original file (0102223.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). 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 | 0101519

    Original file (0101519.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 | 0102478

    Original file (0102478.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.