The available evidence does indicate that the applicant was qualified and recommended for appointment as a Warrant Officer. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly...
The combined compensable rating for these conditions was 40%. The compensable rating for schizophrenia was reduced to 70%, for a total combined compensable rating of 80%. ___________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on June 22, 1999, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Panel Chair Mr. Timothy A. Beyland, Member Mr. Joseph G. Diamond, Member The following...
Panel Chair Attachment: Ltr, HQ ARPC/DPP, 25 August 1999 AFBCMR 85-02593 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 pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to...
___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: While at the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA), he was counseled that he would receive four years of constructive service credit upon graduating from USUHS; that he relied on this counseling in making his decision to attend USUHS; and, that had he known of a change in constructive service policy prior to attending medical school, he probably would have foregone this opportunity and remained in...
___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: While at the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA), he was counseled that he would receive four years of constructive service credit upon graduating from USUHS; that he relied on this counseling in making his decision to attend USUHS; and, that had he known of a change in constructive service policy prior to attending medical school, he probably would have foregone this opportunity and remained in...
___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: While at the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA), he was counseled that he would receive four years of constructive service credit upon graduating from USUHS; that he relied on this counseling in making his decision to attend USUHS; and, that had he known of a change in constructive service policy prior to attending medical school, he probably would have foregone this opportunity and remained in...
By letter dated 9 June 1999, applicant requested an upgrade of his RE Code on the basis of clemency. However, in view of the very limited documentation pertaining to the denial of reenlistment action, as well as the contents of the FBI Identification Record (Exhibit I), we are not persuaded that a change to the applicant’s RE Code is warranted on the basis of clemency. In view of the foregoing, we therefore conclude that no basis exists to change the Board’s previous decision to deny...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 88-02168A
A complete copy of the DPMAJA evaluation is at Exhibit L. The Officer Appointment/Selective Continuation Section, AFMPC/DPPPOC, reviewed the submissions and recommended denial of the applicant's request that a statement be placed in his OSR reflecting he was not eligible for the CY86 Regular Air Force (RegAF) Appointment Board. A complete copy of the DPPPOC evaluation is at Exhibit M. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...
By letter, dated 7 July 1997, applicant requested reconsideration of the Board’s decision and provided additional documentation in the form of a 5 May 1977 letter, subject: Basis of Board Selections, and a document entitled “Evidentiary Support: Illegal Selection Boards.” (Exhibit H) ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The Special Selections Boards (SSBs) and central selection boards which considered his file were conducted contrary to...
SECOND ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 88-02856 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be promoted to the grade of lieutenant colonel; or, that the AF Form 77, Supplemental Evaluation Sheet, which replaced two voided Officer Evaluation Reports (OERs), be altered to inform promotion boards of the reason for the removal...
The applicant requested an administrative discharge board. After consulting with military counsel, on 12 July 1973, the applicant requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of AFM 39-12. The records indicate the applicant’s military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken.
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 90-00851 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ RESUME OF CASE: On 31 July 1990, the Board considered applicant’s request that the Promotion Recommendation Forms (PRFs) for the Calendar Years 1989 and 1990 (CY89 & CY90) Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards be removed from his records; he be considered for promotion...
This physician also stated that, when the applicant was in the Air Force, he had a "medical psychiatric disorder." For an accounting of that consideration, as well as a statement of the relevant facts of the case, see AFBCMR 90-01019, dated 21 February 1991, with Exhibits A through G. ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Consultant, AFMPC/DPMMMR, reviewed this request for reconsideration and recommended no change be made to the...
A complete copy of the applicant’s request for reconsideration is at Exhibit H. By letter, dated 5 Sep 95, the applicant’s wife provided additional documentary evidence for consideration (Exhibit I). Applicant’s complete response and additional documentary evidence are at Exhibit M. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ USAF/JAG reviewed the applicant’s most recent submission and indicated that no new evidence was presented to...
FOURTH ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 91-00564 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ RESUME OF CASE: On 19 February and 15 March 1999, the Board reconsidered applicant’s request that her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of RE-2P (Marginal Performer) be upgraded. In letters, dated 11 April 1999, to the Director, Air Force Review Boards Agency,...
According to the Medical Consultant, the term Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) has come into psychiatric parlance since the Vietnam era, so was not a recognized disorder at the time of the applicant’s discharge. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 2 Sep 99, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Mr. Terry A. Yonkers, Panel Chair Dr. Gerald B. Kauvar, Member Mr. Joseph A....
On 28 Nov 95, the Board granted applicant’s request for removal of the APR closing 30 Oct 87 and recommended that he be provided supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of chief master sergeant for all appropriate cycles commencing with cycle 90S9 (Exhibit J). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, AFPC/DPPPWB, reviewed the applicant’s request and indicated that he was selected for promotion to...
On 28 Nov 95, the Board granted applicant’s request for removal of the APR closing 30 Oct 87 and recommended that he be provided supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of chief master sergeant for all appropriate cycles commencing with cycle 90S9 (Exhibit J). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, AFPC/DPPPWB, reviewed the applicant’s request and indicated that he was selected for promotion to...
On 12 Jul 95, the Board considered and denied his request for reconsideration (Exhibit N). On 22 Dec 98, the AFBCMR responded to the general’s letter (Exhibit P) and the applicant’s case was forwarded for reconsideration of his appeal. Applicant’s numerous assertions that the reviewer of the contested OER was unduly influenced by the rater’s last statement on the contested report regarding his promotion potential which resulted in his receiving a “2” rating are duly noted.
On 2 October 1998, the applicant was considered and not recommended for promotion to the Reserve grade of major general by an SRB for the CY90 Air Force Reserve General Officer Selection Board (Exhibit RRR). Based on this Board’s prior decision, the applicant’s records were considered by a Special Review Board (SRB) to determine whether or not he would have been recommended for promotion to the Reserve grade of major general by the Calendar Year 1990 Air Force Reserve General Officer...
A complete copy of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, Memorandum and Order, is attached at Exhibit H. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Director, Personnel and Training, Air National Guard (ANG/DP), reviewed this application and states the administrative record reviewed and referenced by the court includes Officer Effectiveness Reports (OERs) and a Training Report (TR) that were available to the Board at the time the Board considered applicant’s requests. Upon carefully...
On 4 May 1997, the applicant provided additional documentation and requested reconsideration of her husband’s appeal (Exhibit E). As noted in the Board’s earlier findings, the applicant’s case differs from the case of Barber v. United States, in that there is evidence in the record that the required notification letter was sent to the applicant notifying her of the former servicemember’s decision not to participate in the SBP. ...
On 30 Oct 98, counsel for the applicant provided documentation from the applicant and requested the Board reconsidered his request (Exhibit N). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief Medical Consultant reviewed the documentation provided by counsel and indicated that applicant’s letter continues to address concerns for changes of his medical condition that have occurred since his permanent disability retirement decision and action...
The applicant does not have a PRF on file for the CY91B board because at the CY91B board an eligible officer had to receive a “Definitely Promote” (DP) recommendation to be considered for below-the-promotion zone (BPZ) consideration. By letter dated 1 September 1999, applicant provided additional comments for the Board’s consideration pertaining to the contested OPR, the officer evaluation system and promotion process. Therefore, we agree with the recommendation of the Air Force and adopt...
A copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit E. In an application, dated 15 November 1997, the applicant requested reconsideration of his application on the merits. Applicant’s submission is attached at Exhibit F. The application has been reopened, and forwarded to the Board for reconsideration on the merits of the case. It appears that responsible officials applied appropriate standards in effecting the separation, and we do not find persuasive evidence that pertinent...
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 93-02678 INDEX NUMBER: 111.01, 111.05 COUNSEL: GEORGE E. DAY HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The AFBCMR’s findings of 7 October 1996 ordering him to Extended Active Duty (EAD) and Undergraduate Pilot Training (UPT) be amended to include direction that his date of rank (DOR) to the grade of...
Stratification among promotes by senior raters is allowed, for not every officer can be promoted with a “Promote.” The applicant contends that AFR 36-10 states there are only three PRF ratings: Definitely Promote, Promote, and Do Not Promote. In his most familiar attack on the Air Force promotion system, the author of the applicant’s letter contends that Air Force promotion boards violate 10 U.S.C. In response, they note first that no provision of law exists that specifically requires each...
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 93-02848 INDEX CODES: 111.01, 131.00 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Officer Effectiveness Reports (OERs) for the periods closing 16 Jul 83 and 16 Jul 85 be declared void and removed from her records. In addition to the aforementioned requests, she is also requesting that she be...
On May 26, 1994, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s request for reinstatement to active duty as a brigadier general, at least through the date he would have been eligible to retire in that grade, or allow him to be retroactively recommended for retirement in the grade of brigadier general. His assertion that he would have been denied due process because his grade would require his proving his innocence in a court-martial predisposed to convict him has not been substantiated. ...
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 24 February 1999 for review and response within 30 days. However, as stated by the BCMR Medical Consultant, the applicant was appropriately evaluated and rated for the symptoms she presented at the time of discharge and at no time in the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) processing did she ever indicate any...
In the alternative: He be reconsidered for promotion by the FY 1990 Air Force Reserve General Officer Selection Board in which any reference in the candidates’ Forms 707A, Officer Effectiveness Reports (OERs) which state that the candidate is in the top X% of officers (where X is a number between one and one hundred) is deleted, with special instructions that no candidate will be discriminated against because of corrections to the record or due to being a navigator; with the exception of the...
On 27 Sep 94, the Board considered and denied an application for correction of military records pertaining to the applicant, in which he requested that he be given SSB consideration by the CY92B Lieutenant Colonel Board, which convened on 16 Nov 92 (see AFBCMR 93- 06562), with Exhibit A through D). A complete copy of the DPPPE evaluation is at Exhibit G. The Selection Board Secretariat, AFPC/DPPB, reviewed the applicant’s submission and addressed the portion of his appeal pertaining...
A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit C. On 20 May 99, applicant provided additional documentation requested reconsideration of his application (see Exhibit D). Therefore, after noting his overall service record and in consideration of his honorable discharge, we believe he should be given an RE code of “3K” which will afford him the opportunity to apply for a waiver to enlist in the armed services. The following documentary evidence was...
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 93-07208 (Cs#2) INDEX CODE 131.09 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ RESUME OF CASE: Under the provisions of AFR 31-11, certain administrative corrections had been made to two Officer Performance Reports (OPRs) and the Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) reviewed by Calendar Year 1992B (CY92B) Lieutenant Colonel...
SECOND ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 94-00134 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ RESUME OF CASE On 22 May 1991, the Board considered applicant's 20 June 1990 application requesting his officer effectiveness report (OER), closing 31 May 1986, be removed from his records, he receive Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration, and his senior...
The Senator’s letter, with attachments, is at Exhibit H. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Retirement Policies and Programs, Directorate of Personnel Program Management, AFPC/DPPRR, reviewed this application and states that although the applicant is quoting 10 U.S.C. (2) Applying for separation under the SSB program (which would result in approximately $59,240). He was never counseled concerning the TERA program or changes in the...
In an application, dated 28 Apr 98, the applicant provided additional information and requested the above corrections to his record (Exhibit F). A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit G. The Chief, Evaluation Programs Branch, AFPC/DPPPE, reviewed this application and indicated that the PRF is the responsibility of the senior rater and unless proven otherwise, they consider it to be an accurate reflection of the officer’s record of performance. ...
A complete copy of the Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit G. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel indicated that they continue support the applicant’s contention that he should have been placed on medical hold for medical evaluation board proceedings. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to the Board’s request, the BCMR Medical...
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 94-03164 INDEX CODE: 111.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ____________________________________________________________ RESUME OF CASE On 3 April 1995, the Board considered and denied the applicant's 20 July 1994 application requesting the administrative discharge be revoked and he be reinstated in the Air Force Reserves. He was further advised that, since his request...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9403164AOCR
He was further advised that, since his request for amended relief in the form of an early retirement had not been previously considered by the Board, his request would be staffed for review by the appropriate Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR). The implementation date of the early retirement program was 5 October 1994 and was not grandfathered for prior medical case files completed before 5 October 1994. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit I. APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF...
SECOND ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 94-03273 INDEX CODE 131.01 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ RESUME OF CASE: On 13 June 1995, the Board considered and, by a majority vote, denied applicant’s request to void the Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) prepared for the Calendar Year 1992B (CY92B) Central Lieutenant Colonel Board and provide...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 94-03771 INDEX CODE: 131.00 COUNSEL: NEIL B. KABATCHNICK HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Promotion Recommendation (PRF), AF Form 709, prepared for consideration by the CY91B Lieutenant Colonel Board, which convened on 2 Dec 91, be replaced with a reaccomplished PRF containing an Overall Recommendation of...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 94-03988 INDEX CODE: 110.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect that he was not found medically disqualified for continued service in the Air Force Reserve and transferred to the Honorary Retired Reserve Section. A complete copy of the SG evaluation is at Exhibit...
The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ RESUME OF THE CASE: The applicant is a former Air Force Reserve officer who was assigned to the Retired Reserve in the grade of major, effective 20 Dec 73. A complete copy of the DPJA evaluation is at Exhibit G. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In her initial response, the applicant indicated that,...
(Exhibit D) In an application dated 29 August 1990, the applicant requested that (1) he be promoted to master sergeant (E-7), (2) he be reinstated into active duty, (3) the time out of the service be counted towards retirement, (4) he receive all back pay and allowances, and (5) the portion of his Selective Reenlistment Bonus, which was recouped, be reimbursed. On 16 July 1991, the Board considered and recommended granting the applicant’s request for a service retirement from the Air Force...
On the contrary, the issue here is whether any error has occurred within an internal Air Force promotion recommendation procedure (unlike Sanders, this applicant has not proven the existence of any error requiring correction) , wherein the final promotion recommendation (DP, Promote, Do Not Promote) cannot exist without the concurrence of the officers who authored and approved it. The attached reaccomplished PRF, reflecting a promotion recommendation of IIDefinitely Promote (DP) , be...
SECOND ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FORde the CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 94-04946 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO RESUME OF CASE: On 16 November 1993, the Board considered and granted the applicant’s request that the Company Grade Officer Performance Report (OPR), rendered for the period 14 May 1991 through 4 December 1991, be removed from his records. Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations are attached at Exhibits D through...
In earlier considerations of applications submitted by the applicant, the Board essentially determined that the evidence provided was insufficient to show that the applicant’s records at the time he was considered for promotion to the grade of major were so inaccurate or misleading that the duly constituted selection boards were unable to make reasonable decisions concerning his promotability in relation to his peers. We note that the letter pertains to the preparation of PRFs for majors by...
The Air Force officer promotion boards which considered his records for promotion were held in violation of statute, DoD Directive and Air Force regulations. DPPPA indicated that if the Board should grant the applicant’s request to receive SSB consideration by the CY93A central selection board, with a corrected Apr 93 OPR and CY93A (P0593A) PRF, the “corrected by” annotations on those reports (and any other corrected documents in his OSR) will be removed. In this respect, we note the...
A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit G. On 12 February 1996, the deceased member’s wife submitted a letter and additional documentation requesting her deceased spouse’s records be corrected to reflect a medical retirement. The Air Force’s evaluation, in our opinion, adequately addresses the widow’s contentions concerning the member’s fitness for continued military service at the time of his separation. ...