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 3 Aug 99. The decision of the AFDRB 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’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 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). 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.
INDEX CODE: 121.03 AFBCMR 99-01034 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: APPLICANT 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...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-01037 INDEX CODE: 131.09 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her records be corrected to reflect that she was not demoted from the Reserve grade of technical sergeant (TSgt) to staff sergeant (SSgt). In support of her appeal, the applicant provided documentation pertaining to the demotion action,...
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/counsel for review and response (Exhibit D). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.
At this time it was not possible to complete the reenlistment action nor did the applicant advise the military personnel flight (MPF) that he had to reenlist by 7 April 1999 or lose his SRB entitlement. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that he was honorably discharged on 5 April 1999, rather than 28 October 1999,...
AFBCMR 99-01049 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...
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant’s request on 24 June 1999. 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 99-01054 INDEX CODE: 121.03 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) denied applicant's request on 10 Apr 96. The decision of the AFDRB 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.
In this case, the applicant provides nothing from any of the evaluators, particularly the rater. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachment, is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 14 June 1999, a complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. ...
Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicant’s contentions, we are not persuaded the reenlistment eligibility (RE) code he was issued is either in error or unjust. At the time an RE code is assigned, it reflects the Air Force position regarding whether or not, or under what circumstances, the individual should be allowed to reenlist.
AFBCMR 99-01059 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...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-01065 INDEX CODE 121.03 COUNSEL: No HEARING DESIRED: No APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The monetary loss he suffered upon retirement due to the 13 days excess leave error be corrected. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant's military records, are contained in the letters prepared by the 27th Fighter Wing at Cannon AFB (Exhibit...
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant's request on 16 June 1999. 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 99-01070 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...
AFBCMR 99-01074 Index Number: 133.03 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...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Military Personnel Management Specialist, Separations Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRS reviewed this application and states that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation at the time of his discharge. Applicant neither submitted any new evidence, identified any errors in the discharge processing, nor provided facts to support his claim that...
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: 99-01077 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. Under our broader mandate and after careful consideration of all the facts and circumstances of the member’s case, we are persuaded that applicant has been a productive member 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). 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.
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.
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Counsel states the applicant was an officer who was illegally and improperly selected for early retirement by a board which was unconstitutionally instructed by the Secretary of the Air Force. In every case where an officer requested this, it was done. A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF...
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The applicant’s counsel states that the applicant was an officer who was illegally and improperly selected for early retirement by a board which was unconstitutionally instructed by the Secretary of the Air Force. In every case where an officer requested this, it was done. Because the procedures involved in a SERB required both panels to review all of the records which were being recommended...
INDEX CODE 112.07 AFBCMR 99-01096 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 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. Thus, the fact applicant’s DD 214 was coded as a voluntary retirement had no effect on the applicant litigating his case before the Court of Federal Claims or on his not being contacted by Mr. Steinberg about possible litigation against the Air Force. Because the procedures involved in a...
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The applicant’s counsel states that the applicant was an officer who was illegally and improperly selected for early retirement by a board which was unconstitutionally instructed by the Secretary of the Air Force. In every case where an officer requested this, it was done. Because the procedures involved in a SERB required both panels to review all of the records which were being recommended...
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). Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.
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.
On 30 July 1997, Xnd Air Force Commander determined the Article 15 would be filed in the applicant’s Officer Selection Record (OSR) and Officer Command Selection Record (OCSR). (The IG report found that although the applicant never told the commandant he specifically intended to report the overtime matter to the wing commander, the commandant could reasonably have concluded the subject would arise during the meeting.) A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit...
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 view of the fact that the applicant’s record was in error when considered by the FY99 PV Board, we recommend her records be corrected to the extent indicated below. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, to include the attached Promotion Recommendation Form, AF Form 709, for cycle U0499A, be considered for promotion to the Reserve grade of major...
AFBCMR 99-01118 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 Chief of Staff signed by...
AFBCMR 99-01122 INDEX CODE: 107.00 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 he was awarded the Air Reserve Forces...
AFBCMR 99-01124 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...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request in regard to the award of the Air Force Recognition Ribbon and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant/counsel 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 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.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-01138 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES Applicant requests that his dishonorable discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). On 21 June 1967 and 28 May 1976 the Board for the Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) considered and denied applicant's request for an upgrade of his discharge Exhibit C. After careful consideration of applicant's...
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant, reviewed this application and indicates that the reason for discharge should be changed to Medical Disability Discharge without entitlement to disability separation pay, with appropriate SPD and reenlistment codes applied. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C. The Directorate of Personnel Program Management, also reviewed this application and states that a thorough review of this case file revealed no errors or...
AFBCMR 99-01150 INDEX CODE: 131.09 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...
INDEX CODE: 128.14 AFBCMR 99-01158 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 Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant's request on 12 Apr 99. The decision of the AFDRB 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) denied applicant's request on 13 April 1999. 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 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.
Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A. The applicant entered the Technical School at Keesler AFB, MS on 8 January 1986, to complete the Air Traffic Control Operator course E3ABR27230. This extension would normally satisfy the service retainability for retraining requirements only if the controlled duty assignment (CDA) for the ATC course was less than 23 months and technical school completion date was prior to his initial date of separation of 6 May 1986.