DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 98-02744 MEMORANDUM FOR THE C H I E F O F S T A F F Under the authority of Section 1552, Title lC, 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: The pertinent military records of the Departrent of the Air Force relating...
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 98-02745 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: The pertinen Force relating to to show that five (5) days of leave were added to his...
AFBCMR 98- 02764 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 Force relating to show that she was an effective date ordered to report 0600 and not later than 2400 hours on 7 July 1998, and, her Extended...
The applicant requests that: (1) The PRF for CY92A be upgraded to a DP; and (2) he be considered for promotion to the grade of colonel by SSB for the CY92A Colonel Selection Board. In support of the appeal, applicant submits a statement from the Management Level Evaluation Board (MLEB) President, dated 18 March 1996 and a statement from the Senior Rater, dated 12 October 1998. In regard to the new statement provided by the senior rater now supporting a Definitely Promote (DP) in the...
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 98- 02983 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 th.e 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 Force relating to show that ninetee leave balance. Applicant had 60...
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 98-02995 NOV 0 5 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, t h e decision of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records is announced, and it is directed that: The pertin Force relating to show that on 4 Au reimbursement...
On 5 Sep 9 7 , the applicant provided documentation relating to her post-service activities and requested the Board reconsider her application (see Exhibit F). After reviewing the statements and accomplishments pertaining to her post-service conduct, and noting that she was issued an honorable discharge, we believe her RE code should be changed to \\RE 3A" in order that she may apply for enlistment in the Air Force Reserves. The following documentary evidence was considered: AFBCMR...
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Jut 2 7 1998 IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 96-03264 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: Yes APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Existed Prior To Service (EPTS) designation the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) gave her condition be removed and %how [her] allegations as stated in [her] letters of 28 May 96 and 20 Jun 96 as Age Discrimination and Harassment, not-- 'Insensitivity of your Commander.11' - APPLICANT CONTENDS...
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 96-03270 COUNSEL: Steven E. McCullough HEARING DESIRED: No JUL 3 1 )898: APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT : He be awarded compensation for back pay and retirement points (based on an average of the three previous calendar years) for the period 3 1 December 1994 through 1 November 1996; promoted to the grade of colonel; and reinstated to the same or similar flying position and duties he had before...
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In his response, the applicant stated that, due to an immediate requirement for retainability mandated by a DEROS option selection time requirement, an enlistment extension was unavoidable. Accordingly, we recommend that the applicant’s records be corrected as indicated below. ROBERT W. ZOOK Panel Chair AFBCMR 98-03473 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and...
In addition, while the applicant refers to the Army's "Impaired Health-Care Provider Program, 'I and believes that under current standards, he would not have received the discharge that he did, the majority notes, and as stated by the Air Force, had the applicant committed the offenses in 1997, he still would have been court- martialed. Therefore, a majority of the Board concludes that the court-martial and resulting punishment were proper and find no evidence to recommend the relief...
Of the 25 selected, 14 had not completed the appropriate level of PME, the FY94 board considered 48 members and selected 43 for promotion. 111 Major W---Is case, the Commander, HQ ARPC, stated that, due to significantly lower overall selection rates on the FY96 ResAF board when compared to previous years and ar, apparent correlation between being determined "fully qualified" for promotion 2nd completing PME, it was possible that members of the FY96 ResAF board may not have followed the...
His records be corrected to reflect he was selected for promotion to the Reserve grade of major general by the CY90 Air Force Reserve General Officer Selection Board, which convened on 26 October 1989; and, that he was thereafter promoted with an appropriate date of rank. In an attempt to defuse the impropriety of having served as a voting member of the 1989 selection points out that active duty officers, a lieutenant g two major generals, also served as voting members of the 1989 selection...
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His WD AGO Form 53-55, Enlisted Record and Report of Separation, be corrected to reflect award of the Distinguished Flying Cross, with 2 Oak Leaf Clusters, and the Air Medal, with 8 Oak Leaf Clusters. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Recognition Programs Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPRA, stated that the applicant has provided no documentation to substantiate his claim for additional oak leaf clusters to the Distinguished Flying Cross or the Air Medal. DPPPRA stated that the...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | AFBCMR Decision
The DocuShare Administration screens support five administration categories, corresponding to chapters two through six of this manual. Other administrative functions, such as changing a user’s password, are available anywhere in the site when logged into DocuShare using an administrator account. Administrator Tips and Suggestions Additional tips for managing a DocuShare site such as Managing Repository Growth, Backup Suggestions, Rotating Log Files and Object Restoration.
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC 1998 02318
For a complete description of the facts and circumstances of the case and the Boards rationale for its original decision, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit F. On 7 Aug 07, the Board denied the applicants 28 Dec 06 request for reconsideration (Exhibit G) as his submission did not meet the criteria for reconsideration in that he provided no new or relevant evidence in support of his request. On 15 Jun 09, the Board considered and denied the applicants second reconsideration request...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1995-01123A
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 95-01123 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be reinstated on active duty to complete service for length of service retirement, or favorable consideration for the Voluntary Separation Incentive/Special Separation Bonus (VSI/SSB). ...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1995-02003B
On 29 Jun 98, the applicant provided additional documentation through his senator and requests the Board reconsider his requests and award him 100% disability retirement from the Air Force and change his DOR to 15 Dec 81 (see Exhibit S). _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief Medical Consultant, AFBCMR, SAF/PC, reviewed applicant’s request and indicated that all evidence of record points to the applicant having been...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1995-02908
The Medical Consultant stated that review of medical records does not disclose any evidence to support correction of records from retirement for length of service to disability retirement. However, the Air Force failed to do appropriate testing to show the severity of the problem. The Medical Consultant indicated that had a pacemaker been implanted while applicant was on active duty, he would not have been qualified for worldwide duty.
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1996-00309
Calculating the AFIT commitment based on 15 months placed his last day of commitment before the ending date of the VSI program, thus qualifying him for the VSI. DPPRP indicated that if the applicant believes that non-academic days should not be factored into the ADSC computation, then they suggest that non-duty time should not be counted in calculating the discharge of the ADSC and leave and weekends should be deducted from the service credit since completion of AFIT (see Exhibit C). He...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1996-00383A
___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His requested class date was based on his DEROS (date eligible for return from overseas) of April 1993, and using that date he would not have had the required 21 months retainability after completion of his technical school. The retraining was approved in April 1992 and he received the earliest possible training quota for AFSC 1C1X1. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1996-01099
His record be corrected to reflect selection for promotion (in the promotion zone) to the grade of colonel as if selected by the CY87 Colonel Board. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant stated his petition was filed in a timely manner after he was able to obtain information on the illegal operation of Air Force chaplain boards. As in the...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1996-02343A
By letter, dated 22 September 1997, the applicant stated he never received the advisory opinion for review and comment (Exhibit E). Applicant’s response is at Exhibit G. ___________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: After careful review of the applicant’s complete submissions, the majority of the Board found no evidence that applicant’s physical fitness to perform his duties at the time of his separation was questionable. JOHN L. ROBUCK Panel...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1996-02760
On 18 October 1994, applicant’s commander notified him that a Secretarial determination of satisfactory service, as required by 10 USC 1370, would be made by the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council in deciding the grade in which applicant would be retired. This grade determination resulted in his retirement in the grade of major. We believe that the actions taken by the Air Force were the result of a thorough consideration of the applicant's circumstances and that there was...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1997-00988
He entered his last enlistment on 19 Mar 85, on which date, he reenlisted for a period of four years. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request that his general discharge be upgraded to honorable and his narrative reason for separation be changed. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1997-01318
The service medical records reflect that applicant was hospitalized from 13 April to 10 July 1987 on the psychiatric ward, with his discharge date coinciding with his discharge date from the Air Force. Noting that the medical aspects of this case are explained by the BCMR Medical Consultant (Exhibit C), DPPD stated they were not in complete agreement with his comments and recommendations. In any event, we are not persuaded that the disability for which the applicant is currently receiving...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1997-01967A
On 17 Feb 98, the Board considered and denied an application for correction of military records pertaining to the subject applicant, in which he requested that his records be corrected to reflect award of the DFC, Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon (SAEMR), and the China Service Medal (see AFBCMR 97-01967), with Exhibits A through D). In view of the above, and in recognition of the applicant’s service to the Nation, a majority of the Board recommends that the applicant’s records be...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1997-02747
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 97-02747 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be reinstated for 60 days of leave sold. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1997-02781
On 20 September 1994, the AFBCMR considered and granted applicant’s requests to void the EPRs closing 30 November 1990 and 24 May 1991; reinstatement of his promotion to master sergeant, retroactive to 1 February 1991; reinstatement on active duty; and supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of senior master sergeant for all appropriate cycles, beginning with cycle 94S8. A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC did not provide the applicant...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1997-02889
Effective l October 1996, Title 10, USC 14502 authorized the convening of Special Selection Boards (SSBs) for Reserve Officers who were not selected for promotion and allege the action of the board was contrary to law or involved material error or the board did not have before its consideration material information. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Director of Personnel Program Management, HQ ARPC/DPJA, reviewed this application and...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1997-03007
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 97-03007 INDEX CODES: 111.02, 126.03 126.04, 131.00 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, initiated on 10 Sep 96, and imposed on 19 Sep 96, be set aside and removed from his records. According to counsel, the military has no evidence to support the charges that...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1997-03020
The LOR is used to reprove, correct, and instruct subordinates who depart from acceptable norms of conduct or behavior, on or off duty, and helps maintain established Air Force standards of conduct or behavior. The relationship was not sexual until after his wife was divorced. The evidence of record reflects that the applicant received an LOR for being involved in an inappropriate and unprofessional relationship with the wife of a subordinate member of the Air Force.
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1997-03217
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Staff Judge Advocate, AFPC/JA reviewed this application and states that although the applicant's conduct towards Captain XXXX may have been well intentioned, it was nonetheless “unduly familiar" and unprofessional." AFPC/JA notes that the applicant points out that “unprofessional relationships" are defined by paragraph 2.2 of AFI 36-2909. The following members of the Board considered this application in...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1997-03305
After the first Article 15 was imposed, the commander initiated separation proceedings. The finding of the discharge board is not evidence in and of itself. A complete copy of this evaluation is appended at Exhibit C. The Enlisted Promotion and Military Testing Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, stated that the first time the EPR closing 19 April 1996 would have been considered in the promotion process was cycle 96E6 to technical sergeant (E-6) (promotions effective August 1996 - July 1997).
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1997-03322
The omission of the formal advanced training and the incorrect number of days of supervision, acknowledged by his rating chain and other witnesses, indicate that the contested OPR was not a complete assessment of his accomplishments during the contested rating period, nor a complete record of his preparation, training, and potential for advancement. Air Force regulations required that his 4-month long training course be documented in his OPR rather than in a training report. Exhibit E....
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1997-03345
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Enlisted Promotion Branch, AFPC/DPPPWB, reviewed this application and states that should the Board void the report closing 1 March 1997 as requested, and direct the report closing 1 August 1996 be made a matter of record, providing he is otherwise eligible, the applicant will be entitled to supplemental promotion consideration beginning with cycle 97E7. Based on the documentation submitted, it...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1997-03386
DPPPA notes the 30 Sep 95 OPR was the top document on file for the CY96C board and, as the senior rater states, includes a recommendation for professional military education (PME). As a matter of interest, DPPPA notes the senior rater’s letter, dated 17 Dec 96 (see AFI 36-2401 appeal), states he “did not feel it necessary to reiterate to the promotion board (his) endorsement to SSS on his (the applicant’s) PRF.” The senior rater believed the statement, “If I had one more DP...” was his best...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1997-03397
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 97-03397 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His record, to include an Officer Performance Report (OPR) rendered for the period 30 April 1991 through 1 May 1992, be considered for promotion to the Reserve grade of major by a Special Review Board (SRB) for the Fiscal Year 1998 (FY98) Major Selection Board. On 16 May 1992, the applicant was commissioned in the...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1997-03401
AFPC/DPPPA asserts the applicant’s OPR was accomplished in direct accordance with Air Force policy in effect at the time the report was rendered and are strongly opposed to replacing it with a new version. A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 5 January 1998 for review and response within 30...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1997-03586
If the additional rater now believes the comments he made are invalid, then why didn’t he provide a statement in support of the applicant’s appeal? The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In his response, applicant restated his contentions concerning his accomplishments and the critical oversight on the part of the evaluators on the contested report. ...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1997-03586A
If his request is approved, he also requests that he be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar Year (CY) 1997C Lieutenant Colonel Board. ___________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: After careful consideration of the additional statement provided by the rater on the contested report, we are not convinced that the report is an inaccurate assessment of the applicant’s duty...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1998-00041
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...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1998-00047
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...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1998-00117
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00117 R. KENNEY COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The AF Form 77 (Supplemental Evaluation Sheet), covering the period 3 February 1994 thru 27 November 1994, be removed from his records; the Officer Selection Brief (OSB) reviewed by the Calendar Year (CY) 1997C Lt Colonel Board be corrected in...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1998-00146
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00146 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. Applicant did not submit evidence or identify any errors in the discharge processing nor provided facts that warrant an upgrade of his discharge. We conclude, therefore, that...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1998-00165
The Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) reviewed by the Calendar Year 1996C (CY96C) Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, be declared void and replaced with a reaccomplished PRF. In support of his request, applicant submits a statement from the Senior Rater, who has rewritten the contested PRF and, a statement from the Management Level Review Board President supporting the substitution of the contested PRF with a reaccomplished PRF. A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1998-00187
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Skills Management Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, reviewed the application and states that although miscounseling was confirmed by the MPF, with regard to applicant’s eligibility for the SRB he is requesting, the applicant was still not entitled to a full six-year SRB based on three extensions of enlistment. HQ AFPC/DPPAE states that if partial relief is granted, because of the applicant...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1998-00232
The Officer Performance Reports (OPRs), closing 7 March 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 and 14 November 1994, be replaced with corrected OPRs covering the same periods. The original performance reports do not fully reflect the applicant's contributions to the Air Force and the Air National Guard. They also recommend the applicant be considered by the next Air National Guard Colonel Federal Recognition Review Board.
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1998-00238
For instance, DPPPAB does not understand how the racial issues affected the areas rated in items 3, 4 and 5 of Section III of the contested report. However, these documents do not, in our opinion, support a finding that the evaluators, who were also the evaluators on his prior report, were unable to render unbiased evaluations of the applicant’s performance or that the ratings on the contested report were based on factors other than the applicant’s duty performance during the contested...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1998-00239
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.