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). 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.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Appeals & SSB Branch, AFPC/DPPPA, reviewed this application and indicated that promotion nonselection is not an issue. In ~yinstance, the applicant failed to provide a letter of support from the rater of the contested report. But the time to do that is before the report becomes a matter of record.
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. The applicant was released fkom the United States Air Force on 1 August 1959 at- Air Force Bas-d Ready Reserve, on 2 August 1959.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). d. There were no provisions in the laws during these open enrollment periods requiring the Services to notify spouses of retired members if the member did not enroll. However, if the decision of the Board is to grant relief, the decedent's record should be corrected to show on 21 Sep 72 he made an SBP election for spouse...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Applicant did not provide a rebuttal by the suspense date and subsequently officials in the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force approved the findings of the previous two boards and directed the applicant’s discharge with severance pay and a 10 percent disability rating. This code was correct at the time of his discharge.
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS JUN 2 6 IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 97-03699 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: NO Applicant requests his DD Form be corrected to reflect foreign service and awards for service in Vietnam. 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...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and pxovided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C ) . However, if the decision is to grant the relief sought, applicant’s record should be corrected to reflect his liE code as “3K: Reserved for use by HQ AFPC or the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) when no other reenlistment eligibility code applies or is appropriate.” - sgt, USAF Chief, Skills Mugement...
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant's request on June 29, 1995. The AFDRB Brief 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.
At that time, an officer was required to serve three years in- grade in order to retire in-grade unless (as he was led to believe) a waiver was granted by the President. At that time, an officer was required to serve three years in grade in order to retire in grade unless (as applicant was led to believe) a waiver was granted by the President. His application included a request to waive Section 1370, Title 10, U.S.C., which requires officers in the grade above major or lieutenant...
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...
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Separations Branch, Directorate of Personnel Program Management, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed this application and states that information reflected on his WD AGO Form 53-59, they find no evidence to indicate the applicant's discharge, over 48 years ago, was incorrect, an injustice occurred to the applicant, or 97- 03744 that the discharge did not comply with the discharge directive in effective at the time of his discharge. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation...
If neither the member nor the former spouse requests the election change during the one-year eligibility period, former spouse coverage may not be established thereafter. Discussion: Even though the member did not make a valid election change, there is no evidence he requested coverage for his former spouse be terminated or established for his new spouse following his remarriage, all indicative of his intent to maintain his former spouse as the eligible SBP beneficiary. Recommendation:...
nt of the Air C k e f Examiner Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records D E P m m N T OF THE AIR FORCE AIR NATIONAL GUARD READINESS CENTER MEMORANDUM FOR TAG OH/ESSO FROM: ANGMPPUA 3500 Fetchet Avenue Andrews AFB, MD 20762-5157 SUBJE Correction of Military Record member of the of Military Records submitted by SrA National Guard, is forwarded for equests that his promotion date of rank (DOR) be changed to 22 Feb 97. FOR THE COMMANDER /- I BENNIE L. UMSTEAD, Chief, Special Actions...
Although SBP premiums may continue to be deducted from the member’s retired pay following divorce, the former spouse is not eligible to receive annuity payments in the event of the member’s death. Discussion: Although the member did not submit a valid election to voluntarily change from spouse to former spouse coverage within the first year following divorce, there is no evidence that he requested coverage be terminated and continued to pay SBP premiums, indicative of his intent to maintain...
1 Aug 95, weighed 180, MAW 172; gained one pound and lost 2% body fat. The records indicate applicant's military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken. In addition, applicant appears to have followed the Weight Management Program (WMP) 'procedures and at one time had gone eight months without a failure.
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 facts and opinions stated in the advisory opinion appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been adequately rebutted by applicant. The applicant is requesting reinstatement of his tentative selection to CMSgt for the 97E9 promotion cycle.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Promotion, Evaluation and Recognition Division, AFPC/DPPP, reviewed the application and states that the applicant contends the close out date for the MSM, 20LC should be some time after 16 October 1995 instead of 22 September 1995, yet he did not include anything, such as an amended citation or special series order, to substantiate his contention. However, as noted by the Air Force he did not provide any evidence to substantiate that the close out date on...
, 5 JUN 3 0 1998 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, and having assured compliance with the provisions of the above regulation, the decision of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records is announced, and it is directed that: The pertinen nt of the Air , be corrected Force relating to to show that, on 31 August 1996, he elected Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) spouse and child coverage...
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C. The Chief, Appeals & SSB Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPA, also evaluated the case and would have no objection to the applicant meeting an SSB with the 25 November 1996 OPR in her records and the requested duty title change made to the CY97A OSB. The applicant, a medical service corps officer, requests special selection board (SSB) consideration for the CY97A (3 Feb 97) (P0497A) major board, With inclusion of the officer performance report...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). However, Public Law (PL) 105-85 (effective 17 May 1998) provides an opportunity for retirees to terminate participation in the SBP beginning on the second anniversary of their receipt of retired Pay - For further information, applicant should contact the Retiree Services Branch (AFPC/DPPTR) at 1-800-531-7502. Backaround: When the...
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 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...
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the advisory opinions and indicated that his senior rater provided a statement indicating the original PRF was in error and subsequently needed to be replaced with a new PRF correcting all the errors. He requests that the Board order the replacement of his original PRF with the reaccomplished PRF, as supported by his former senior rater and MLR president; and, direct promotion to lieutenant colonel as if selected by the CY96...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Available Master Personnel Records C. Advisory Opinion D. AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion DEPARTMENT O F THE A I R FORCE HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE PERSONNEL CENTER RANDOLPH AIR FORCE BASE TEXAS MAR 1 8 1998 MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR FROM: HQ AFPCLDPPRS 550 C Street West Ste 11 Randolph AFB TX 78150-4713 SUBJECT: Application for...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided an 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). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.
Attachment: Ltr, ANG/MPPU, dtd Jul 13, 1998, w/Atch DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 97-03797 AUG 2 5 #gj MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, and having assured compliance with the provisions of the above regulation, the decision of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records is announced, and it is directed that: of the Air The...
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS JUL 2 0 = IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 97-03799 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: Yes Applicant requests her record be changed to show she declined to participate in the Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP) when she was first eligible. 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,...
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, AFPC/DPPPAB, reviewed this application and indicated that the first time the contested report was considered in the promotion process was cycle 95E7 to master sergeant (promotions effective Aug 95 - Jul 96). A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Chief, BCMR & SSB Section, AFPC/DPPPA, also reviewed this application and indicated that, although the applicant provides a copy of an unsigned draft EPR...
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.
- ..... ..... ~ AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AUG 1 4 IN THE MATTER QF: DOCKET NO: 97-03806 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO Applicant requests that his discharge order, issued by the Air Force Reserve, be amended to correct his service number and to show he was promoted to sergeant. 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...
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). Based on the above, we recommend denial of applicant’s request for correction of RE code.
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS NOV 3 3 IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 97- 03814 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No - Applicant requests that his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of er or Discharge) be corrected to show overseas service in from January 1957 to December 1958 during his four-year enlistment in the Air Force. The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the...
(Exhibit C) The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit D) . Available Master Personnel Records C. ROP AFBCMR 95- 02984, dtd 11 Feb 97; Memorandum for the Chief of Staff, dtd 7 Oct 97 D. Advisory Opinion E. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion DEFENSE FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING SERVICE DENVER CENTER 6760 E, IRVINGTON PLACE DENVER, COLORADO 80279 DFAS-DE/FYCC MAR 1 9 1998 SUBJECT:...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-01172 INDEX CODE: 128.14 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be reinstated the In-Place Consecutive Overseas Tour (IPCOT) Travel Entitlement. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPC, dated 14 May 98. VAUGHN E. SCHLUNZ Panel Chair AFBCMR 98-01172 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and...
The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant fcz- xe'~iew and response (Exhibit D). After careful conslderatiop CT applicant's request and ti-le avallahle evldence of record, ~A-C find insufficient evidence of error or in7ustice to warrant zx-rectlve action. Accordingly, applicant's request 1s 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). Available Master Personnel Records C. Advisory Opinion D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE LEGAL Sf RVICES AGENCY (AFLSA) 6 \I MAR 1998 MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR FROM: AFLSA/JAJM(Lt Col Petrow) 112 Luke Avenue, Room 343 Bolling Air Force Base, DC 20332-8000 SUBJECT: Correction of Military...
V Air Force Review Boards Agency AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER O F : DEC 0 8 1998 DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00011 COUNSEL : HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REOUESTS THAT: The Article 15s, dated 26 January 1995 and 13 February 1995, be removed from his records. The applicant claims he was exonerated and, as.a result, the Unfavorable Information File (UIF) was removed from his record but they forgot to remove the Article 15s from his record. I...
They have reviewed the 5 proceedings of the BO1 and resulting discharge action. Although we find insufficient evidence to support this contention, after thoroughly reviewing the additional documentation submitted by applicant's counsel, and considering the totality of the evidence of record, we believe the applicant has been the victim of an error or injustice. We find no evidence the applicant placed altered OERs in his records.
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 98-00016 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO Y Applicant requests that his Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed. 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).
Title IO. the decision of the Air Force Board fbr Correction of’ Military Records is announced. ilitary records of- the Department of the Air Force relating to be corrected to show that at the time of his discharge on 1 1 It is fiirther directed that.
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air be corrected to - MOND H. WELLER Examiner Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC JUN 3 0 1998 Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 98-00024 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: Having carefully reviewed this application, we agree with the recommendation of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the The advisory opinions were application be denied (Exhibit C ) . 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.
Applicant alleges that his Officer Performance Report (OPR) closing 20 February 1997, was submitted on the wrong form and believes that this error had a negative influence on the CY97C lieutenant colonel selection board members. However, after reviewing applicant's comments to the Air Force evaluation, we are persuaded that his corrected record should be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the CY97C board. application.
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS AUG 1 9 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 9 8 - 0 0 0 3 0 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES Applicant is the widow of a former service member who requests that the former service member's disability retired grade be changed from captain to major. AI1 promotions to the grade of major and above must be confirmed by the Senate before an officer can be promoted. requests that her FACTS: Applicant entered into the military...
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 facts and opinions stated in the advisory opinion appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant. We recommend disapproval of the applicant’s request for award of the “medal that was awarded Korean War vets.” FOR THE COMMANDER A57 4 7 - , GEORGIA #.
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 and his counsel for review and response (Exhibit D). The applicant had previously submitted an application to the BCMR in June 1986 for record correction, but this apparently was not acted upon in lieu of first being considered by the SAFPC Discharge Review Board, He applied for...
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC Office of the Assistant Secretary A I ’ 13 C M R 9 8 - 0 0 03 7 Having received and considered the reconmendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authorit! Section 1552, ’Title 10. United States Code (7012 Stat 116)- it is directed that: change of’ station (PCS) to his home of’ record ~homt.
Neither his (applicant’s) commander or the appellate authority thoroughly reviewed all of the evidence. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s complete submission, we are not persuaded that the Article 15 was either in error or unjust and agree with the rationale provided by the Air Force Legal Services Agency (AFLSA). _______________________________________________________________________ _____________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military...
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00042 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REOUESTS THAT: A waiver of the six-month extended active duty eligibility requirement be approved in order for him to be considered for promotion to the grade of major by the CY98B Major Biomedical Sciences Corps (BSC) Central Selection Board, which convened on 6 April 1998. DPPPO stated that although the applicant requests a waiver...
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC JU"l2 1998 Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 98-00046 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, and having assured compliance with the provisions of the above regulation, the decision of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records is announced, and it is directed that: Th Force r show th el to Permane he is a Federal 23 June tment of the...
After thoroughly reviewing the applicant’s military records and the documentation submitted, we believe there was an injustice to the applicant regarding the debt incurred as a result of her failing to pass the nursing state board examination. It appears that the applicant received her nursing degree on 8 May 1993 and was accessed into the Air Force under the Nursing Officer Corps for which she received a lump sum bonus of $5,000. Therefore, we recommend the applicant's records be...