RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-00266 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge and his Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed. The applicant has not identified any specific errors in the discharge processing or provided...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). 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.
INDEX CODE: 131 AFBCMR 99-00271 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 , be corrected to show that she was promoted to the Reserve grade of...
AFBCMR 99-00272 INDEX CODE: 128.00 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 , be corrected to show that his spouse, daughter, and son were...
AFBCMR 99-00275 INDEX CODE: 137.04 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 , be corrected to show that on 31 July 1977, he elected spouse...
Personnel in this category enlisted in the grade airman basic (E-1) with a date of rank (DOR) equal to their RegAF date of enlistment, unless qualified for grade credit under the provisions of Table 2-2 AFR 33-3, Enlistment in the United States Air Force. AFR 33-3, Enlistment in the United States Air Force, Chapter 1, dated 18 January 1985, outlines the qualifications for enlistment (prior service and non-prior service) in the Regular Air Force. As such, based on the referenced AFR 33-3,...
His MSD was adjusted to 1 Apr 99, which is the first day of the seventh month after the month in which the President approved the report of the board that considered the officer for the second time. The compound effect of that guidance and his decisions based on that guidance has left him in a position of being forced to leave the service after 17 years, 8 months, and 13 days of satisfactory service. The applicant was notified that, due to his second deferral, he must be discharged, as...
The applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A. The applicant was released from the Army Reserve on 6 June 1977. The applicant was appointed in the Washington ANG effective 1 May 1979 and assigned to the 560th Air Force Band.
INDEX CODE: 102.04, 136.01, 137.02 AFBCMR 99-00283 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: Having carefully reviewed this application, we agree with the recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility 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. Panel Chair Attachment: Ltr, ANG/DPPU, dtd May 28, 1999, w/Atch AFBCMR 99-00283 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF...
He states there were Air Force members who had failed this treatment program two or three times and were given chances, but he wasn’t given any. The discharge complies with directives in effect at the time of his discharge. 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). 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.
AFBCMR 99-00287 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: APPLICANT Having carefully reviewed this application, we agree with the recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility 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. Therefore, under the authority delegated in AFI 36-2603, the applicant's records will be corrected as set forth in the accompanying...
Therefore, under the authority delegated in AFI 36-2603, the applicant's records will be corrected as set forth in the accompanying Memorandum for the Chief of Staff signed by the Executive Director of the Board or his designee. His extension of his 6 September 1996 enlistment executed on 20 May 1998 for a period of 25 months be, and hereby is, declared void. He was honorably discharged effective 19 May 1998 and reenlisted in the Regular Air Force on 20 May 1998 for a period of four (4)...
Despite this, the applicant claims the MPF stated he had to accept the C-141 training because he had three and one-half years remaining on his UPT ADSC. Despite Block II of the AF Form 63 not being initialed, the applicant signed the AF Form 63 reflecting the correct ADSC and thus accepted the ADSC (Exhibit C with Attachments 1 through 4). In this case, however, the applicant has presented persuasive evidence that he agreed to the C-141 IQT training under the assumption that he would incur...
AFBCMR 99-00293 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: Having carefully reviewed this application, we agree with the recommendation of the Air Staff 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. Therefore, under the authority delegated in AFI 36-2603, the applicant's records will be corrected as set forth in the accompanying Memorandum for the Chief of Staff signed by...
INDEX CODE: 137 AFBCMR 99-00294 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 it is directed that: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to , be corrected to show that on 1 March 1986, under provisions of Public Law 99-145,...
INDEX CODE: 128.14 AFBCMR 99-00298 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: APPLICANT Having carefully reviewed this application, we agree with the recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility 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. Therefore, under the authority delegated in AFI 36- 2603, the applicant's records will be corrected as set forth...
AFBCMR 99-00299 INDEX CODE: 131.00 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: Having carefully reviewed this application, we agree with the recommendation of the Air Staff 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. Therefore, under the authority delegated in AFI 36-2603, the applicant's records will be corrected as set forth in the accompanying Memorandum for the Chief...
The appropriate offices of responsibility evaluated applicant's requests and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit B). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit C). The facts and opinions stated in the advisory opinions appear to be based on the available evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant.
He also directed that the applicant be provided supplemental promotion consideration with her corrected record. On 5 Dec 96, the Board recommended that the applicant’s records be corrected to reflect that the EPR rendered for the period 31 Mar 90 through 18 Feb 91 be accepted for file in its proper sequence; that the EPR rendered for the period 31 Mar 90 through 18 Jun 91 be amended in Section I to show the period of the report as 19 Feb 91 through 18 Jun 91 and the reason for the report as...
In August 1993, applicant submitted a request to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) for an upgrade of his discharge to honorable. After a review of the available records, it is concluded that the applicant has not submitted a timely application upon which corrective action can be taken. We also note AFLSA/JAJM’s recommendation in which they conclude that the applicant has not submitted a timely application upon which corrective action can be 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). 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.
For a decoration to be eligible for consideration in a promotion cycle, the close-out date of the decoration must be on or before the PECD, and the date of the RDP must be before the date of selections for the cycle in question. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachment, is attached at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 26 July 1999, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. After reviewing...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-00320 INDEX CODE: 100 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed from RE 2B to RE-1, so that he may reenlist in the Regular Air Force. Applicant did not identify any specific errors in the discharge processing nor provide facts which warrant a change in...
Since the IG investigation sustained the applicant's allegation that the contested report was written as an act of reprisal, equity dictates that the report be declared void and the applicant be reconsidered for promotion to major by an SSB for all boards that the report was a matter of record. It is further recommended that he be considered for promotion to the grade of major by Special Selection Boards for the Calendar Years 1996C and 1997E Central Major Boards; and that, if selected for...
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.
INDEX CODE 115.03 AFBCMR 99-00326 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: Having carefully reviewed this application, we agree with the recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility 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. Therefore, under the authority delegated in AFI 36-2603, the applicant's records will be corrected as set forth in the...
Based on their findings and the evidence provided by the applicant, DPPPOC believes that there were miscommunications among the personnel at applicant’s ROTC Detachment. Also, the opportunity exists for him to receive a RegAF Appointment if selected for promotion to major and his record reflects his ROTC DG status. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In response to 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). 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 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.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-00331 INDEX CODE: 131 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING: NO The applicant requests that his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty and, the DD Form 256, Discharge Certificate, be corrected to reflect “Senior Airman” vice “Airman First Class.” Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A. The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory...
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). As to applicant’s request concerning his combat flights, overseas service and award, after careful consideration of his request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action.
INDEX CODE: 128 AFBCMR 99-00338 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 ----- ---------, be corrected to show that he requested, and a...
AFBCMR 99-00345 Index Number: 121.03 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. Therefore, under the authority delegated in AFI 36- 2603, the applicant's records will be corrected as set forth in the accompanying Memorandum for the...
Applicant’s requests for an upgrade of discharge and a change in the reason for discharge were denied by the AFDRB on 26 January 1996. The records indicate member’s military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel for the applicant reviewed the evaluation and states that the action officer...
Considering the evidence provided, they do not support promotion reconsideration. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and states that he spoke with a member at AFPC, Officer Promotion Branch, and he stated that “there is nothing wrong with your record, I wish I could tell you there was something that...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action.
In view of the findings, the board recommended that the applicant be discharged and furnished an undesirable discharge. The records indicate the applicant’s military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken. Accordingly, DPPRS recommended the applicant’s request be denied (Exhibit C).
AFBCMR 99-00358 INDEX CODE: 100.00 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: Having carefully reviewed this application, we agree with the recommendation of the Air Staff 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. Therefore, under the authority delegated in AFI 36-2603, the applicant's records will be corrected as set forth in the accompanying Memorandum for the Chief...
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request for upgrade of his discharge (Exhibit C). 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.
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request for upgrade of his discharge (Exhibit C). 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.
AFBCMR 99-00362 Index Number: 137.00 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. Therefore, under the authority delegated in AFI 36-2603, the applicant's records will be corrected as set forth in the accompanying Memorandum for the...
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant's request on 21 January 1999 (Exhibit C). 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.
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request for upgrade of his discharge (Exhibit C). 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.
Panel Chair Attachments: 1. Ltr, BCMR Medical Consultant, dtd May 25, 1999 2. Ltr, AFPC/DPPD, dtd Jul 8, 1999, w/Atch INDEX CODE: 108.01, 108.02, 108.04, 128.08, 110.02 AFBCMR 99-00366 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...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action.
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). 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.
However, his record as a 17 year old was never expunged. Pursuant to the Board’s request, a letter was sent to the applicant concerning submission of additional post-service evidence (Exhibit E). We therefore conclude that no basis exists to recommend favorable action on the applicant’s request.
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). 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.
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her deceased spouse never received the package notifying him of his eligibility to participate in the RCSBP. It is the member’s responsibility to provide an address at which he could receive official correspondence. Exhibit E. Applicant’s Response, dated 17 Apr 99.