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.
AFBCMR 99-03137 INDEX NUMBER: 137.034 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...
In support of his request the applicant submitted a brief by counsel, copies of numerous supportive statements and U.S. District Court findings from the states of California and District of Columbia in which the courts ruled in favor of the plaintiffs against the U.S. Air Force and Navy in similar cases involving administrative discharges for drug abuse. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Enlisted Promotion and Military Testing Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, stated that the first time the contested report was considered in the promotion process was Cycle 98E8 to senior master sergeant (E-8), promotions effective Apr 98 - Mar 99. The Directorate of Personnel Program Management, HQ AFPC/DPPPAB, stated that the applicant included a letter of support from his rater, which reiterates Air Force...
He provided no facts warranting a change in his narrative reason for separation or a change in his separation code. A complete copy of their Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the advisory opinions and states that it has been four years since his discharge, and it was less than six months from his discharge that he discovered an error and...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Directorate of Personnel Program Management, HQ AFPC/DPPP reviewed this application and recommended denial. Exhibit B. RICHARD A. PETERSON Panel Chair AFBCMR 99-03151 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it...
The Joint Service Achievement Medal (JSAM) dated 13 October 1998, awarded for the period 9 December 1995 to 16 February 1996, be considered for promotion cycles 97E6 and 98E6 (TSgt). Concerning the applicant’s request for consideration of the Joint Service Achievement Medal for the period 9 December 1995 through 16 February 1996 in the 97E6 and 98E6 selection cycles, the recommendation package was not initiated until 2 October 1997. TEDDY HOUSTON Panel Chair AFBCMR 99-03158 MEMORANDUM FOR...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-03161 INDEX CODE:110.00 APPLICANT COUNSEL: NONE SSN HEARING DESIRED: NO Applicant requests his discharge be upgraded. The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision. DAVID W. MULGREW Panel Chair Exhibits: A.
___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: The Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, AFPC/DPPPWB, evaluated this application and provided the following information regarding the impact of the two EPRs on the applicant’s promotion consideration: The first time the two EPRs impacted the applicant’s promotion consideration was cycle 94A6 to TSgt (promotions effective Aug 93–Jul 94). We therefore recommend that the contested reports be corrected as indicated...
The Air Force in their advisory of 24 January 2000, indicates that in their review of the applicant’s overall record they would have no objection to upgrading applicant’s discharge to general (under honorable conditions) if a check of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) files proves negative. RICHARD A. PETERSON Panel Chair MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR) FROM: SAF/MI 1660 Air Force Pentagon Washington, DC...
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). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.
The court erroneously informed the Board that her dismissal would not affect her benefits. Also in January 1996, the applicant’s USSTRATCOM commander recommended that the application for retirement be disapproved, but if approved, that she be retired as a 1st lieutenant. Therefore, we find no compelling basis upon which to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant's military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that thirteen (13) days...
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). The facts and opinions stated in the advisory opinions and the AFDRB Brief 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). 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: 121.03 AFBCMR 99-03183 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. JOHN J. D’ORAZIO Chief Examiner Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records Addendum to Record of Proceedings The following members of the...
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.
Based on the information provided, DFAS-DE/FYCC finds there has not been an error or an injustice and recommended the applicant’s request be denied (Exhibit D). Inasmuch as the applicant is a civil service employee working in the same organization, performing similar duties, as he did while on active duty, we are of the opinion that the Government has received no less benefit now that he is a civilian than if he stayed on active duty. TERRY A. YONKERS Panel Chair AFBCMR 99-03192 MEMORANDUM...
The Academic Education section on the OSB reviewed by the CY99A Colonel Selection Board be corrected to show Virginia Military Institute 1978 rather than “UNK.” 4. The applicant’s contentions concerning information missing from his OSB before the CY99A Colonel Selection Board are duly noted. Furthermore, neither the information concerning where and when he received his bachelor’s degree, nor the command level for his current assignment, was reflected on his two previous OSBs, which were...
In accordance with policy, the application was forwarded to this Board for further consideration (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. Available Master Personnel Records C. AFDRB Brief D. AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-03198 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Purple Heart (PH) Medal for injury sustained in . A complete copy of the advisory opinion is at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF 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). Applicant's daughter’s response to the advisory opinion is at Exhibit E. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit...
AFBCMR 99-03207 Index Number: 128.00 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: APPLICANT 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...
AFBCMR 99-03208 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 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. JOHN J. D'ORAZIO Chief Examiner Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records Addendum to Record of Proceedings The...
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.
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 NO: 99-03219 INDEX CODE: COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO Applicant requests addition of the Air Medal to his DD Form 214. 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 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.
His retirement documents were completed with everything for him to sign as a SSgt based on verbal information from the AFOSI. The applicant states that he was not court-martialed because there was no evidence against him. ___________________________________________________________________ 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...
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant's requests on 25 Feb 00. In accordance with policy, the application was forwarded to this Board for further consideration (Exhibit C). The decision of the AFDRB was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D).
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 99-03239 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 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...
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.
AFBCMR 99-03242 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...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-03246 APPLICANT COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES Applicant requests that the Board restore his rank to staff sergeant. 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).
However, considering the discharge occurred over 40 years ago and considering his previous four years of honorable service and the offense that caused his BCD, DPPRS recommends clemency. Having found no error or injustice with regard to the actions that occurred while the applicant was a military member, we conclude that no basis exists to grant favorable action on his request. Exhibit E. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 8 Mar 00.
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 counsel for review and response (Exhibit C). The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision.
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: 99-03253 INDEX CODE: 110.00; 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of “2C” be changed to a “1” and that his Entry Level Separation be changed to a hardship discharge. However, we find no basis upon which to recommend changing the reason for his discharge...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-03255 INDEX CODE: 131.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be given Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration for Senior Service School (SSS) candidacy by the Calendar Year 1999A (CY99A) Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection (P0599A) Board, which convened on 19 Apr 99. Since the...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-03256 INDEX CODE 110.02 106.00 XXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her 1995 general discharge be upgraded to honorable and the narrative reason of “Misconduct” be changed to “Convenience of 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 report was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit G). Available Master Personnel Records C. Advisory Opinion D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion E. AFBCMR Post Service Request F. FBI Report G. AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding FBI Report
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.
Therefore it cannot be verified that a request to change the closeout date was, in fact, submitted to the original approval/disapproval authority for determination. ___________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that the closeout date for award of the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) was 1 December 1998, rather than 1 June 1999;...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 99-03263 INDEX NUMBER: A39; 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The report was forwarded to the applicant for review and response, within 30 days (Exhibit F). ...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 99-03265 INDEX NUMBER: A39; 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). We therefore conclude that the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the...
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, within 30 days (Exhibit C). The applicant’s response is at 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 19 June 1953, he was discharged from the Air Force with a bad conduct discharge. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Military Personnel Management Specialist, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed the application and states the applicant had two previous summary courts- martial for being...
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 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.