AFBCMR 99-00741 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...
When it was time for him to go on terminal leave, he had one final team meeting to discuss his progress with his supervisor, counselor, first sergeant, commander, and the officer overseeing the SART program. After a thorough review of the available records, we found no evidence that the RE code assigned at the time of applicant’s separation was in error or contrary to the governing regulation. Accordingly, we recommend that the records be corrected as indicated below.
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 Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision.
In support of her appeal, Applicant provided the recertification letter from the American Board of Family Practice, dated 11 Sep 95; her PRF for the CY94 MC Colonel Selection Board; and the OSB for the CY96 MC Colonel Selection Board (Exhibit A). He cited AFI 36-2501, Officer Promotions and Selective Continuation, paragraph 6.3.2.2, which states, “Do not have an SSB if, by exercising reasonable diligence, the officer should have discovered the error or omission and could have taken...
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.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 99-00751 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to general. Exhibit B. CHARLENE M. BRADLEY Panel Chair AFBCMR 99-00751 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of...
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.
AFBCMR 99-00758 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...
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). 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.
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant's request on 12 May 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 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. Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.
However, he has still not provided any documentation showing he was in the Area of Responsibility. Since the applicant has failed to state when he was supposed to have been in the Area of Responsibility, and has not provided any official documentation showing when and where he was TDY from Spain in order to earn the Kuwait Liberation Medal, we can not verify his eligibility for the Kuwait Liberation Medal (Kuwait). Applicant’s records do not indicate any Persian Gulf awards or statements...
On 29 Sep 98, the Secretary of the Air Force approved the recommendation of the United States Air Force Academy Superintendent to disenroll applicant and directed that he be honorably separated from cadet status, transferred to the Air Force Reserve and ordered to active duty for a period of three years. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Staff Judge Advocate, HQ USAFA/JA, stated that the applicant was disenrolled from the Air Force...
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 BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that competent authority determined that his actions on 9 May 1988, near Enterprise, Kansas, merited the award of the Airman’s Medal for heroism, rather than the Air Force Commendation Medal, First Oak Leaf Cluster. Exhibit D. Applicant’s Letter, dated 6 May 99, w/atch. RICHARD A....
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.
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.
AFBCMR 99-00801 INDEX CODE: 115.00 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...
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: While he understands the ADSC commitment he incurred as an Air Force Academy graduate, he separated from active duty to enter the Air Force Reserve. The applicant states that he has been on active duty status in the Air Force Reserve since 8 March 1999, and will remain on active duty until 28 April 2000. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-00805 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The EO recommended that the applicant be discharge for unsuitability and given a general discharge. Exhibit B.
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.
INDEX CODE: 102.05, 131.09 AFBCMR 99-00808 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...
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.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-00814 INDEX CODE: 131 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING: NO The applicant requests that his DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, be corrected to reflect the grade of staff sergeant (E-5). 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...
If the Board grants the request, the cost of premiums should be deducted from payments. He provided documentation that clearly indicates the Ready Reserve Mobilization Income Insurance Program was established by Congress to provide coverage for Reservists who have been issued an order to involuntary active duty for covered service under the authority of Title 10, USC, Section 12304. ___________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board...
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. Panel Chair Attachment: Ltr, AFPC/DPPAE, dtd 21 Apr 99, w/atch AFBCMR 99-00817 INDEX CODE: 112.00 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...
He has two honorable discharges and one general discharge. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and indicated that he has tried many times over the years to get his discharge upgraded. BARBARA A. WESTGATE Panel Chair AFBCMR 99-00818 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records...
Regarding award of the DFC, prior to 14 Aug 43, this decoration was awarded on the basis of 35 missions of operational flight against the enemy. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel reviewed the advisory opinion and stated the applicant’s injury was the result of damage to the aircraft by enemy flak during a bomb run, and, therefore, was a direct result of...
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). The facts and opinions stated in the advisory opinions appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant.
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.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-00825 INDEX CODE: 100.03 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed so that he can enlist in the United States Marine Corps. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 7 May 99. PATRICIA J. ZARODKIEWICZ Panel Chair INDEX CODE: 100.03 AFBCMR...
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.
In response to the Board’s request, applicant submitted a W.D.A.G.O. 100, Separation Qualification Record which is attached at Exhibit B, and stated that he had no other documentation pertaining to his military service. The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision.
INDEX CODE: 121.03 AFBCMR 99-00831 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...
INDEX CODE: 112 AFBCMR 99-00832 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 honorably...
Overall 93 of the 2,086 colonels under consideration by the SERB were members of a minority group and/or women, of which 28, or 30.1 percent, were selected for early retirement. The board shall prepare for review by the Secretary and the Chief of Staff, a report of minority and female officer selections as compared to the selection rates for all officers considered by the board. Because the procedures involved in a SERB required both panels to review all of the records which were being...
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: 131 AFBCMR 99-00838 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 BRIAN M. AFRICANO, 455-39-3902, be corrected to show that he enlisted...
INDEX CODE; 128 AFBCMR 99-00839 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,...
On 7 July 1999, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied an application submitted by applicant requesting upgrade of his discharge to honorable (see AFBCMR Hearing Record at Exhibit C). A copy of the AFDRB Hearing Record was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). Available Master Personnel Records C. AFDRB Hearing Record D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding AFDRB Hearing Record
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit B). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (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 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.
AFBCMR 99-00856 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...
After careful consideration of applicant's request and the limited documentation which was available, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action. The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision. Members of the Board Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Mr. Patrick R. Wheeler, and Mr. Grover L. Dunn considered this application on 1 Jun 99 in accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-2603 and the governing statute, 10 U.S.C.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states that his former supervisor concurred with the AFCM. Awards should be given for duty performance during the tour of duty. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 3 May 99.
AFBCMR 99-00867 Index Number: 137.00 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: SSAN: 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...
AFBCMR 99-00868 CODE INDEX: 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 10 June 1997, he elected former...
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.