On 29 Jun 95, applicant was notified that his commander was recommending that he be discharged from the Air Force for fraudulent entry. The Board requested applicant provide additional evidence pertaining to his post-service activities (Exhibit G). We note the letters of recommendation provided from applicant’s Military Personnel Records from 1995.
INDEX CODE: 121.03 AFBCMR 01-00841 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...
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). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-00846 INDEX CODE: 110.00 APPLICANT COUNSEL: None SSN HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Undesirable Discharge be upgraded to an Honorable Discharge. He has been sober for twenty-five years. Applicant’s request for an honorable discharge was considered but based on the overall records, a further upgrade...
He includes Army/Air Corps officers’ letters, dating from 1945-46, recommending his promotion to major and asserting he was recommended for promotion to captain on or about 5 Mar 42. 295, dated 24 Oct 44, the applicant was promoted to the grade of captain effective that date. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that he should be promoted to the grade of major.
AFBCMR 01-00849 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 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...
A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He states, first AFPC states that he did not exercise reasonable diligence, since the information was available in his Officer Preselection Brief (OPB) 100 days prior to the promotion board. All we can know for certain is that according to Air Force Pamphlet 36-2506, the board members should have considered this fact. ...
Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A. HQ AFPC/DPPRS administratively corrected applicant’s DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, to reflect in Item 24, Character of Service as “uncharacterized.” 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, within 30 days (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). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.
AFBCMR 01-00853 INDEX NUMBER: 128.10 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 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 01-00856 INDEX NUMBER: 137.04 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...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-00857 INDEX CODE: 111.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She received a referral report and referral letter by entering into the first unsatisfactory period of the weight management program (WMP). ...
Members of the Board Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., and Mr. Jay H. Jordan, considered this application on 22 May 01. Panel Chair Attachment: Ltr, AFPC/DPSFM, dtd 18 Apr 01 AFBCMR 01-00859 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...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-00860 INDEX CODE 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded two additional Air Medal (AMs) for his last ten combat missions. Had the recommendations been submitted and denied, they do not believe any documentation would be found in his records, since he and his records had departed...
Now there is only one entry for the applicant’s assignment at HQ Air Force. The applicant takes issue with the statement by AFPC/DPPAPP1 that “Based upon source documents, and assignments officer evaluation it was determined that officers duty history was correct at the time of the P0500A selection board.” AFPC/DPPPO state that they concur with he findings of AFPC/DPAPP1 yet also state that “HQ AFPC/DPPAPP1 compared the duty history entries to those duty titles on the applicant’s officer...
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.
_______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The citation for his AFCM (3OLC) was not included in his officer selection record (OSR) that met the CY00A central lieutenant colonel selection board although he had previously verified that it was part of his master personnel record during a Spring 1999 records review at the Air Force Personnel Center. The board was aware of the decoration, however, since the decoration was included on the officer...
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. Members of the Board, Mr. Frederick R. Beaman III, Mr. E. David Hoard, and Mr. Roscoe Hinton considered this application on 29 August 2001. AFBCMR 01-00867 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code and Air...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: 01-00870 INDEX CODE 128.10 128.14 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The $320.08 additional excess cost charges associated with the shipping of her household goods (HHG) be remitted. PATRICK R. WHEELER Panel Chair AFBCMR 01-00870 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-00873 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: Not Indicated _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Southwest Asia Service Medal (SWASM) be added to his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. While the applicant was unable to provide a copy of his travel orders for the period in question,...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed this application and indicated that as medical history records are prepared from information provided by the individual, it is equally difficult to understand how or why this particular history should not be considered valid in spite of the inaccurate SSN upon which the appeal is based. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-00876 INDEX CODE 121.01 121.03 COUNSEL: No HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be reimbursed for all leave, pay, and allowances for 28 days charged as excess leave. Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSFM, dated 21 May 01, w/atchs. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 1 Jun 01.
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The CY00B central major selection board may have compared his Army Officer Evaluation Reports (OERs) with the Air Force Evaluation System. Following his appointment as an Air Force officer, he received 3 Officer Performance Reports, in which his overall evaluations were “Meets Standards.” In addition, his record contains an AF Form 475, Education/Training Report documenting his attendance at...
Members of the Board Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Mr. Laurence M. Groner, and Mr. Clarence D. Long, III, considered this application on 26 June 2001. Panel Chair Attachment: Ltr, AFPC/DPPAE, dtd 4 June 2001 AFBCMR 01-00878 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...
INDEX CODE: 112.05, 112.03 AFBCMR 01-00883 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...
AFBCMR 01-00884 INDEX CODE: 112.00 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 Chief...
INDEX CODE: 128.14 AFBCMR 01-00886 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 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 opinion appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant.
AFBCMR 01-00889 INDEX CODE: 112.00 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 Chief...
INDEX CODE: 137.04 AFBCMR 01-00890 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...
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. Members of the Board Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Mr. Laurence M. Groner, and Mr. Clarence D. Long III, considered this application on 26 June 2001. RICHARD A. PETERSON Panel Chair Attachment: Ltr, AFPC/DPPAE, dtd 4 Jun 01 AFBCMR 01-00892 INDEX CODE: 112.07 MEMORANDUM...
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 01-00896 INDEX NUMBER: 112.00 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. Members of the Board, Ms. Kathy L. Boockholdt, Ms. Barbara J. White-Olson, and Ms. Rita S. Looney, considered this...
A review of the applicant’s record indicates he completed 20 years, and 14 days of Honorable Federal service as of 9 December 1965, the date of his discharge from the United States Air Force Reserve (USAFR). However, only 18 years, 7 months, and 5 days of this time is satisfactory Federal service creditable toward retired pay eligibility. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit...
Although the applicant could not correct the error in the HAF files, she could have identified the problem to the board members in a letter. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant stated that she and her superiors exercised reasonable diligence in discovering the error, and over the course of the next year, they attempted to correct the error with SAF Manpower,...
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.
As of this date, no response has been received by this office. Therefore, we recommend he be reimbursed in accordance with the Joint Federal Travel Regulations (JFTR), for his and his dependents travel expenses. BARBARA A. WESTGATE Chair AFBCMR 01-00904 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 is...
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Senior Attorney-Advisor, HQ AFPC/JA, also reviewed the application and states it is unfortunately true that Air Force Drug Testing Labs have at times experienced lapses in following the proper processes while testing urine samples. The applicant's urine sample prior to his discharge was tested twice and both times tested positive for marijuana. Based on the evidence submitted that office recommends denying...
_______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The citation for the Meritorious Service Medal, Second Oak Leaf Cluster (MSM, 2OLC) was not in his officer selection record (OSR) and the MSM, 4OLC was not reflected on his officer selection brief (OSB) when he was considered for promotion to colonel by the CY00A central colonel selection board. By SO G-GA82, dated 30 May 00, he was awarded the MSM, 4OLC. The complete evaluation is 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). 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). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.
He reenlisted in the Regular Air Force on 3 December 1990 in the grade of senior airman for a period of six years. At the time of his reenlistment on 3 December 1990, neither the applicant nor the military personnel flight (MPF) had any reason to believe his AFSC would get an SRB. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the opinion and...
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.
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, within 30 days (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 available at the time the application was filed.
AFBCMR 01-00925 INDEX NUMBER: 110.02 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 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: 01-00929 INDEX CODE 110.02 100.06 COUNSEL: No HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her “2C” (Involuntarily Separated with an Honorable Discharge) reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to one allowing reenlistment, and the narrative reason for her discharge be changed from “Personality Disorder” to “Failure...