RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-01253 INDEX CODE 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Purple Heart (PH) and the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). When he returned to base, he was told that all four of the aircraft’s gun barrels had burned out as a result of the continuous firing, rather than the required...
When she was subsequently considered in the correct promotion AFSC, 8B000 (Military Training Instructor), she was not selected. According to the Air Force, had she been considered in the MTI career field, she still would not have been selected because her test score was too low. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that...
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 or his designee. Members of the Board Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Mr. Roscoe Hinton Jr., and Mr. Richard A. Peterson considered this application on 18 July 2001. DAVID C. VAN GASBECK Panel Chair Attachment: Ltr, HQ AFPC/DPPTR, dtd 26 Jun 01, with attachment AFBCMR 01-01261 INDEX CODE:...
Although he received an overall rating of 8 on his performance report, the comments of his reporting official indicated that he had difficulties in maintaining standards as required by AFR 35-10. f. Substandard duty performance (20 Jan 82 - 31 May 92). The Board requested applicant provide additional evidence pertaining to his post-service activities (see Exhibit F). However, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force based on the facts that existed at the time of his separation.
INDEX CODE: 121.03 AFBCMR 01-01273 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: 01-01274 INDEX CODE: 111.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Enlisted Performance Report (EPR), rendered for the period 9 January 1989 through 8 January 1990, be changed to reflect a promotion recommendation of “5.” _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT...
Based on there being no indication from the Air Force Reserve that it gave advance notice to the applicant, and based on evidence presented by the applicant, and in the absence of a basis to question the integrity of this individual, we recommend that any doubt be resolved in favor of the applicant and conclude that the reason for his assignment to ARPC should be changed. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records Exhibit C. Letter, AFRC/DPM, dated 6 August 2001. JOHN L. ROBUCK Panel...
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 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.
His DD Form 214 reflected award of the AFOUA with V device and eight (8) OLCs and the Joint Meritorious Unit Award (JMUA). According to DPPPR, the applicant responded on 17 Jun 01, providing documentation that enabled them to verify his entitlement to the Kosovo Campaign Medal with First (1) Bronze Service Star and Humanitarian Service Medal. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation 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.
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.
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 or his designee. Members of the Board Mr. Henry Romo Jr., Ms. Olga M. Crerar, and Mr. Philip Sheuerman considered this application on 3 July 2001. HENRY ROMO JR. Panel Chair Attachment: Ltr, HQ AFPC/DPAPP3, dtd 21 May 01, with attachment AFBCMR 01-01291 INDEX CODE: 100.00 MEMORANDUM FOR THE...
Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Recognition Programs Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPR, reviewed this application and states that on 25 May 01, they requested the applicant provide a copy of the citations to the basic DFC and all the Air Medals. On 27 Jul 01, DPPPR forwarded the case to the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) for determination of the applicant's...
AFBCMR 01-01304 INDEX CODE: 121.03 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: SSAN: 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...
DPPRS stated that, based upon the documentation in the file, applicant’s discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and that the discharge was within the sound discretion of the discharge authority. We thoroughly reviewed applicant’s entire record and the circumstances surrounding the discharge and we find the evidence of record supports his discharge for misconduct (pattern of minor disciplinary infractions). We have noted the...
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Upon discharge from the Air Force he was given the 2I RE code on his DD 214 because he was a non-US citizen serving an enlistment. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Assistant Chief, Skills Management Branch, AFPC/DPPAE, reviewed the application and states that the code of 2I, “Non-U.S. citizen serving on initial enlistment with an honorable...
Members of the Board, Messrs. David C. Van Gasbeck, Richard A. Peterson, and Roscoe Hinton Jr., considered this application on 18 July 2001. Panel Chair Attachment: Ltr, AFPC/DPPAE, dtd 21 Jun 01, w/atchs AFBCMR 01-01313 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...
AFBCMR 01-01314 INDEX NUMBER: 100.00 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: APPLICANT Having carefully reviewed this application, we agree with the recommendation of the Air Force 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 01-01315 INDEX CODE: 128.09 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: SSAN: 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...
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 01-01320 INDEX CODE: 112.05 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...
Members of the Board, Messrs. David C. Van Gasbeck, Richard A. Peterson, and Roscoe Hinton Jr., considered this application on 18 July 2001. Panel Chair Attachment: Ltr, AFPC/DPPAE, dtd 21 Jun 01, w/atchs AFBCMR 01-01321 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...
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 REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant's wife submitted a letter stating if they had been counseled adequately they would have not chosen to resume SBP coverage. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 25 September 2001 under the provisions of AFI 36- 2603: Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel...
At that time, he requested that the appropriate duty title be loaded into the personnel system. Although the OPB was received prior to the applicant reporting to his new duty station, he had sufficient time prior to the board to ensure his new duty information was updated and accurate. RICHARD A. PETERSON Panel Chair AFBCMR 01-01324 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-01328 INDEX CODE: 121.00 APPLICANT COUNSEL: None SSN HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Twenty-four days of leave be reinstated to his leave account. The applicant provided an AF Form 1089, which the member completes at the time of reenlistment. ...
Members of the Board Mr. Joseph G. Diamond, Mr. Edward H. Parker, and Mr. Jackson A. Hauslein, considered this application on 25 Jul 01. Panel Chair Attachment: Ltr, AFPC/DPPAE, dtd Jun 21, 01 AFBCMR 01-01331 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...
Another individual's (Lt Col S---‘s) ACP agreement was faxed after his agreement and that individual received his payment on 29 Dec 99. The fact that he was not paid during 1999 was caused by his 27 day delay in signing the agreement from program inception; the massive volume of agreements that were being processed; the government closures from the holidays and the Y2K computer issues; and, different payment dates at Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) (see Exhibit B). ...
The Board majority believes that in fact, he promptly reported to the finance office when his spouse arrived and initiated the appropriate action to ensure his pay records were correct; and, he subsequently reported the error in his records immediately after he discovered it. Exhibit B. Exhibit E. Minority Report, dated 1 Aug 01.
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.
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, within 30 days (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.
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.
Given the short period of time in grade, the lengthy period of misconduct, and the severe impact of that misconduct, the Board found that he had failed to serve satisfactorily as a lieutenant colonel and unanimously agreed that he should be retired in the grade of major. On 25 February 1997, the Director, Air Force Review Boards Agency, acting in behalf of the Secretary of the Air Force, determined that the applicant did not serve satisfactorily in the higher grade of lieutenant colonel and...
He was considered and not selected for continuation by the CY2000A Major Continuation Board. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Chaplain Personnel Management Division, Directorate of Assignments, HQ AFPC/DPAH, states that the applicant submitted an age waiver request on 30 March 2001. The applicant did not submit any new evidence or facts that allow him to extend his time on active duty with an age waiver.
INDEX CODE 110.02 AFBCMR 01-01350 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 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 counsel for review and response (Exhibit D). Members of the Board Mr. Terry A. Yonkers, Mr. William H. Anderson, and Mr. Albert F. Lowas, Jr. considered this application on 22 Aug 01 in accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-2603 and the governing statute, 10 U.S.C.
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.
A complete copy of the Air Force Evaluation is at Exhibit C. The Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, also reviewed this application and indicated that the applicant stated the wrong cycle and he actually means the 93A5 cycle, which he missed selection by less than 3 points. Current Air Force promotion policy dictates that, before a decoration is credited for a specific promotion cycle, the closeout date of the decoration must be on or before the promotion eligibility cutoff date...
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 or his designee. Members of the Board Mr. Henry Romo Jr., Ms. Brenda L. Romine, and Mr. James W. Russell III considered this application on 24 October 2001. HENRY ROMO JR. Panel Chair Attachment: Ltr, HQ AFPC/DPPRRP, dtd 21 Sep 01, with attachments AFBCMR 01-01360 INDEX CODE: 128.14 MEMORANDUM...
The applicant has not provided any statements from the commander or the first sergeant. A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR STAFF EVALUATION: Upon review of the Air Force evaluations the applicant submitted additional letters of support from the commander and the first sergeant. The applicant did not provide any evidence as to why the contested report was not an accurate...
Based on the information provided, DPPPR recommends denying the applicant's request. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 24 Aug 01, for review and response. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this...
INDEX CODE: 112.07 AFBCMR 01-01371 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...
While his case file reflects a recommendation package for the award of the BSM was submitted on 6 December 1991, the final decision was not to award him for this decoration. The recommendation package is a recommendation only; the decision to approve or disapprove such a recommendation rests with a award approving authority. Other than his own assertions, the applicant has not provided evidence which was unavailable during the processing of the award recommendation.
AFBCMR 01-01374 INDEX NUMBER: 112.07 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: XXXXXXXXXX, XXX-XX-XXXX 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...
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His EPR should be removed from his records because the rater signed a blank form and the rater did not intend to give him an overall rating of “4.” In support of his request applicant submits a copy of the contested EPR; personal statements from the rater and indorser; a copy of the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) decision; and an AF Form 931, Performance Feedback Worksheet. The following is 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). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-01385 INDEX NUMBER: 131.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Officer Selection Record (OSR) and Officer Selection Brief (OSB) that met the Calendar Year 2000A (CY00A) Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board (6 Nov 00) be corrected to include his...
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, within 30 days (Exhibit D). Applicant’s response to the advisory opinion, with attachment, 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...
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.