In support of her appeal, the applicant provided a personal statement, Election Statement For Former Spouse Coverage, DD Form 1882 (Survivor Benefit Plan Election Change - Former Spouse) , DD Form 2293 (Application For Former Spouse Payments From Retired Pay), and other documentation. The law does not permit former spouse coverage after divorce if the member was married at the time of retirement, but declined spouse coverage. The following members of the Board considered this application...
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC 3Ul - 11998 a 5 Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 98-00763 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code, 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: records of the Department of the Air Force relating t- e corrected to...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request that his records be corrected to reflect award of the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit D). After careful consideration of applicant's request that his records be corrected to reflect award of the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to...
under honorable submission is at 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 2 c DEPARTMENT O F T H E AIR FORCE HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE PERSONNEL CENTER MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR FROM: HQ AFPCDPPRS 550 C Street West Ste 11 Randolph AFB TX 78150-4713 SUBJECT: Application for Correction...
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 is requesting he be promoted to A3C (E-2) earlier than 1 Feb 55, the date he was promoted. The applicant enlisted 25 Aug 53 in the grade of Airman Basic (E-l), was promoted to A3C (E-2) 1 Feb 55, promoted to A2C (E-3) 1 Jun 56, promoted to A1C (E-4) 1 Sep 59 (A1C (E-4) redesignated Sgt (Ed)), and to SSgt (E-5) 1 Dec 68.
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). disapproval of the applicant's request for award of Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon.
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Applicant'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. The appIicant filed a similar appeal under AFI 36- 240 1, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation...
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC JUN 8 0 898 Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 98-00784 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BGFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJEC -'. fl Having carefully reviewed this application, we agree with the recommendation of the Air Force Evaluation and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has been the victim of either an error or an injustice. f Panel Chair Attachment: Ltr, HQ USAFDPPC, dtd 1 Apr 98 DEPARTMENT OF...
Of the 25 selected, 14 had not completed the appropriate level of PME, the FY94 board considered 48 members and selected 43 for promotion. Exhibit C. Record of Proceedings for Major W---, dated 28 May 96. BENEDICT A. KAUSAL IV Panel Chair AFBCMR 98-00788 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it...
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). 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.
In summary, no senior rater, no MLRB President, no central selection board, and no -special selection board has ever reviewed his CY90 (1 year BPZ)"records that included the revised CY89 ( 2 year BPZ) PRF. Based on the SRR review of his PO589 PRF and subsequent upgrade, the applicant was considered and not selected for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by SSB for the CY89A Board. Based on upon a senior rater review (SRR) of his previous CY89 (1 5 May 89) lieutenant colonel...
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 98-00792 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code and Air Force Instruction 3 6 - 2 6 0 3 , 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 pertinent militarv records of the Denartment of the Air show that seven...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's rewest and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). After careful consideration of applicantls request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action. Available Master Personnel Records C. Advisory Opinions D. SAF/MIBR Ltrs Forwarding Advisory Opinions DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE HEADQUARTERS AIR RESERVE PERSONNEL...
The applicant filed an appeal under AFI 36- 2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports, which was denied by the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board ( E m ) . A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORC E EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the evaluations and has provided comments to each paragraph of the evaluation concerning the removal of the contested report. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 21 Apr 98.
Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A. undesirable discharge be upgraded to 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 commander recommended involuntary discharge be taken against the applicant for admitted homosexuality. The case was processed to the discharge authority and on 17 Oct 55 the discharge authority directed the applicant be discharge with an...
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 A I R FORCE HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE PERSONNEL CENTER RANDOLPH AIR FORCE BASE TEXAS MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR FROM: HQ AFPC/DPPRS 550 C Street West Ste 11 Randolph AFB TX 78 150-47 13 The applicant, while serving in the...
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DEC 0 8 7998 DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00817 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANTREOUESTS: His Certificate of Release or Discharge, DD Form 214, be amended, to reflect award of the Air Force Good Conduct Medal (AFGCM). AIR FORCE E VALUATION : The Recognition Programs Branch, AFPC/DPPPRA, reviewed this ,application and states that award of the AFGCM requires three years of exemplary service; however, he...
The RDP date, which is the date the RIP was requested, is 1 Apr 97. d. The Promotion Eligibility Cutoff Date (PECD) for Cycle 97E7 was 15 May 97. Current Air Force promotion policy (AFI 36-2502, Table 2.2, rule 5, Note 2) dictates that before a decoration is credited fox a specific promotion cycle, the close out date of the decoration must be on or before the promotion eligibility cutoff date (PECD), and the date of the DECOR-6, Request for Decoration Printout (RDP), must be before the date...
He submitted an application for retirement which prompted an officer grade determination. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice to warrant retiring the applicant in the grade of captain. Applicant has provided no persuasive documentation that the 2 98-00819 officer grade determination process was in error, nor has he demonstrated that the Air Force Personnel Board's recommendation and the SAFIs decision to retire him...
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Retiree Services Branch, AFPC/DPPTR, reviewed this application and states that at the time of the applicant's divorce there was no provision under the SBP law to continue coverage to a former spouse. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did noz demonstrate the existence of probable material error o r injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only be...
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. request for promotion to Major, . Furthermore, although he provides us with 2 OERs; promotions are generally based on much more information.
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98- 00838 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His date of reenlistment be changed from 5 January 1 9 9 8 to Bonus (SRB) . He requested to have his reenlistment back dated to 25 January 1 9 9 8 , to receive the SRB. 98-00838 AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Skills Management Branch, Directorate of Personnel Program Management, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, reviewed this case and...
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00838 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: NO RESUME OF CASE: On 10 September 1998, the Board considered applicant's request that his reenlistment date be changed from 1 5 January 1998 to 20 January 1998. The Board found insufficient evidence of a probable error or an injustice and denied the application. The applicant contends that he was miscounseled regarding his...
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 FOX C J R R E C T I O N O F F ~ I L I T A R Y EiECORDS mmxr; z- PFOCEEDINSS IN THE MATTER OF: IIOCKET NU:vI5 ER : 9 8 - 0 0 8 4 2 C'OUKSEL : NONE 1iE;ARING DESIRED : NO Applicant requests il! T h e amended AF Form 3156, Record of Proceedings of Vacation of Suspended Nonjudicial Punishment, dated 11 D e c e m D e r 1,987 be placed In his official record, and ( 2 ) t h e appropriate offenses, if his record be corrected ta 1-er-ect any, on the AF Forrri 3370, keto-d of...
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS SEP 1 6 IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 98-00847 COUNSEL: NONE C l HEARING DESIRED: NO Applicant requests that the citation to accompany the award of the Air Force Commendation Medal, second oak leaf cluster, (AFCM 20LC) be added to his Officer Selection Record (OSR) for review by the CY 97A lieutenant colonel medical/dental corps selection board, which convened on 5 November 1997. The appropriate Air Force office...
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 requests award of the Legion of Merit, recommended 6 Sep 43, but never received. We recommend disapproval of the applicant's request to be awarded the Legion of Merit based on a World War 11 recommendation.
Ltr, HQ AFPC/JA, dtd May 20, 1 9 9 8 , w/Atch DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE PERSONNEL CENTER RANDOLPH AIR FORCE BASE, TEXAS MEMORANDUM FOR SAF/MIBR 4 May, 1998 FROM: HQ AFPCDPPPWE 550 C St West Ste 10 Randolph AFB TX 78150-4712 SUBJECT: Application for Correction of Military Records We have reviewed an adjustment to his date of rank to 1 Aug 96. application and recommend approval of his request for As documented in the application, f selected for promotion to MSgt during...
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASH IN GTO N , D. C. Office of the Assistant Secretary AF'BCMR 98-00866 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code and AFI 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 directed that: it is of the Department of the Air Force relating to corrected to show that he was...
STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant's military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Skills Management Branch, AFPC/DPPAE, reviewed this application and indicated that HOR is defined as the place recorded as the home of the individual when commissioned, It enlisted, is recorded in the military personnel record for the sole purpose of...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). As a result of this misconduct, you received a letter of reprimand (LOR) on 4 June I996 (Atch 2). As a result of this miscontluct, you rcccivcd an LOC 011 23 April 1996.
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). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.
The appropriate Air Force off ice evaluated applicant I 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). .” Another states “I know that I can reenlist rather than extend, but I have elected to execute this extension instead of reenlisting.” Both of these statements clearly indicate the applicant was aware of the reenlistment options.
Cfiief Examiner Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 9 8 - 0 0 8 8 7 - 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 applicant has been the victim of either an error or an injustice. The applicant requests...
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: On 21 October 1992, he went to the AFB Personnel Center to check on the SBP status of hi insure that she was enrolled, and also to enroll two newly adopted small children (of his deceased son) during the SBP Open Enrollment Election period. Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A. At the time, he did not receive any paperwork pertaining to the fact that his wife or his children were enrolled.
Had he properly reviewed his OPB at that time, he could have written a letter to the CY97C board president to ensure the information was present for the CY97C board's review - especially if the PME entry was important to his promotion consideration. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C . The Air Force has indicated that the entry for the Brazilian PME course was missing from the applicant's Officer Selection Brief (OSB) reviewed by the CY97C board.
It may also be necessary for the DFAS-DE to communicate directly with you to obtain additional information to ensure the proper settlement of your claim. Sincerely b i e f Examiner Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records ’ Attachment: Copy of Directive w/Cy of Proceedings cc : DFAS -DE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC AFBCMR 98-00901 MEMO~NDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT : Having carefully reviewed this application, we agree with the...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The applicant is requesting award of the Air Force “Accommendation Award” (Air Force Commendation Medal) for the period of 196 1 - 1964 and 197 1 - 1973. The applicant has provided a score notice for the 72A7 promotion cycle (promotions for this cycle was normally exceeding Aug 71 - Jan 72 but were carried over to Jul 72) reflecting...
He had completed a total of 2 years, 3 months and 7 days of service at the time of his discharge from the Army National Guard. A complete copy of this evaluation is appended at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and indicated that his pay date of 5 November 1982 must have been the date the Base CBPO was going on when he was told to attend a meeting on the SSB/VSI...
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 records indicate member’s military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken.
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 applicant was approved for retraining into AFSC lClXl and required 30 months retainability after class graduation date.
a e x e 7 : : h a s b e e n p r e s e r , t e c AFBCMR 98-00927 LXKLE;: -7 Exhib-t B. ExRiblr C. Exhibit 3 . We are granting your request for a spccial selection board (SSB) which will consider your record for thc CY97A ( 5 Nov 97) (M0597C) central lieutenant colonel selection board based on the iiiissirig information in the Academic Education, Decorations. In many cases, a correction to om’s military record makes other administrative corrections appropriate.
The AFBCMR Medical Consultant also recommends applicant’s narrative reason for separation be change since his medical condition was not a personality disorder. Applicant was notified by his commander on 02 Feb 98 that involuntary separation action was being recommended against him because he had been diagnosed as having a condition that interfered with military service, mental disorder. We concur with the AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s recommendation that his narrative reason for separation...
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). Background: During our review we were unable to locate documents that confirmed review his personal file m e r f o r m e d TDYs while assigned overseas.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). To be awarded the PH, a member must provide documentation to support he was wounded as a direct result of enemy action and must have received medical treatment by medical personnel. In May 1998, our office reviewed the applicants records in response to his request for the PH.
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 first is whether the Board should waive the three year statute of limitations.
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 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. Applicant bases his request for changing his DOR on a “missed promotion board.” The applicant entered active duty on 27 Jul97.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C) . Current Air Force promotion policy (AFI 36-2502, Table 2.2, Rule 5 , Note 2) dictates that before a decoration is credited for a specific promotion cycle, the close out date of the decoration must be on or before the promotion eligibility cutoff date (PECD), and the date of the DECOR-6, Request for Decoration Printout (RDP) must be...
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS JUL 2 0 1998 IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00954 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REOUESTS THAT: His extension of enlistment on 15 June 1994 be canceled and he be reenlisted into the Regular Air Force for six years with entitlement to a Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB). AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Skills Management Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, reviewed the application and states that the applicant was...
DPPRR indicated that, while the applicant’s actions were clearly heroic, he was not eligible for Secretarial review for award of the 10 percent pay increase because the DFC was awarded for heroism in a combat situation. A complete copy of the DPPRR evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 15 Jun 98 for review and...