AFBCMR 01-02056 INDEX CODE: 137.00 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: APPLICANT, SSN 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...
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, which is at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPTR states that in the past, DPPTR recommended favorable consideration in cases in which the widow petitioners claim they were not notified of their sponsor's SBP election and The Air Force had no evidence to refute their claims. 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, 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.
AFBCMR 01-02067 INDEX CODE: 137.00 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: APPLICANT, SSN 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...
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 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...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02073 INDEX NUMBER: 121.03 XXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Ten days of leave charged to her between graduation from a technical training course and her scheduled port call be restored. AFI 36-2102, attachment 7, states that “No member will be in an involuntary leave...
AFBCMR 01-02074 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...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02076 INDEX CODE: 111.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Enlisted Performance Report (EPR), rendered for the period 13 July 1999 through 31 May 2000, be removed from his records and he be provided supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of staff sergeant (E-5) for the 01E5...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending that the disability severance pay amounts be verified through financial channels and the remarks section of the DD Form 214 be corrected, if appropriate (Exhibit C). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). TERRY A. YONKERS Panel Chair Exhibits: A.
Therefore, we recommend that her records be corrected as indicated below. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 29 September 1998, she executed an SGLI Form 8714, Application for Veterans’ Group Life Insurance (VGLI), effective 1 May 1999. TERRY A. YONKERS Panel Chair AFBCMR 01-02078 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF...
AFBCMR 01-02080 INDEX NUMBER: 121.00 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. 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.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02083 INDEX CODE: 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 4H be changed to 1J, which defined means “Eligible to reenlist, but elects separation.” RE Code 4H is defined as “Serving suspended punishment pursuant to Article 15, Uniform Code of Military...
_________________________________________________________________ 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. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, the Board agrees with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force and adopts their rationale as the basis for our conclusion 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 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. RICHARD A. PETERSON Panel Chair Exhibits: 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). The applicant should be advised that the RE code 2X is for “First term airman, second-term, or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program.” We noted that an AF Form 418, Selective...
INDEX CODE: 128.02 AFBCMR 01-02095 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...
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was not selected for an Active Guard Reserve (AGR) position based on the fact that he did not have Enlisted Performance Reports (EPRs) accomplished in a timely manner. During this time, EPRs were an optional item of the AGR application and included at the discretion of the applicant. A complete copy of the ARPC/CV 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). 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 01-02103 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. Therefore, under the authority delegated in AFI 36- 2603, the applicant's records will be corrected as set forth in...
AFBCMR 01-02107 INDEX CODE: 102.06 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...
At that time, RCSBP coverage and premiums were suspended. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR states that SBP spouse coverage is suspended when the spouse loses eligibility. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and the recommendation of the Air Force and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the...
According to the case file, there was no evidence introduced at his court-martial or at the discharge board hearing to indicate that he personally used marijuana. It appears the applicant believes her late husband did not commit an offense triable by a military court. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice;...
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. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation provided a copy of an Investigative Report (FBI No. Exhibit D. FBI Investigation Report #890324C Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 24 Aug 01, and AFBCMR, dated 19 Sep 01.
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. Richard M. McCormick and Ms. Olga M. Crerar, considered this application on 16 October 2001. RICHARD A. PETERSON Panel Chair Attachment: Ltr, AFPC/DPPAE, dtd 20 Sep 01 AFBCMR 01-02122 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.
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). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.
AFBCMR 01-02132 INDEX NUMBER: 100.00 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. 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 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.
It was not until the day the FY02 board convened that the senior rater was contacted directly by ARPC and notified that a memorandum had been required designating her as the “primary” to AF/XO position 39574. The Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states that her ineligibility for a PV promotion was due to the 11th Wing not revising the Unit Manning Document (UMD)...
AFBCMR 01-02143 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...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPO advised that the permanent promotion system for Regular Officers was controlled by the Officer Personnel Act of 1947. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his records should reflect he was retired in the permanent, rather than temporary, grade of colonel. In this regard, the applicant was considered but not recommended for...
AFBCMR 01-02150 INDEX NUMBER: 128.02 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. Members of the Board, Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, and Mr. Michael J. DAVID C. VAN GASBECK Panel...
A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings is at Exhibit G. In an application, dated 24 July 2001, the applicant requested reconsideration of his appeal and provided additional evidence. The applicant contends that at the time of his discharge, he was suffering from epilepsy, grand mal, and should have been medically discharged. Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit H. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: The...
Neither the applicant nor his former spouse submitted a request to change the election from spouse to former spouse during the required time frame. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we believe that the applicant's records should be corrected to reflect that he elected former spouse coverage under the RCSBP within the required timeframe. DAVID C. VANGASBECK Panel Chair AFBCMR 01-02153 INDEX CODE: 137.00 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPW indicated that Section 312 of Public Law 106-419, 1 Nov 00, automatically increased the level of SGLI coverage for all eligible military members from $200,000 to $250,000 effective 1 Apr 01. Members who failed to complete a new SGLV 8286 during the month of Apr 01 to elect a lower amount of coverage or “no coverage” were automatically covered for $250,000 in accordance with public law. It is...
Discharge action was initiated in the applicant’s case due to her failure to meet military obligations by not completing her dependent care certification. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS 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 personal appearance; and the that the application will only be reconsidered...
INDEX CODE: 131.01 AFBCMR 01-02160 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 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.
_________________________________________________________________ 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, which is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPTR states that in the past, DPPTR recommended favorable consideration in cases in which the widow...
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a personal statement, a letter from his supervisor, dated 17 March 1999, proposed citation for the AFCM, w/2OLC, and other documentation. Applicant has not provided a copy of an RDP-DECOR6. We took particular note of the statement from the applicant's supervisor who indicated that the applicant is truly deserving of this recognition - award of the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM).
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 01-02175 INDEX CODE 100.06 126.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No Applicant requests that his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of “4H” (Serving suspended punishment to Article 15) be upgraded 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...
AFBCMR 01-02177 INDEX CODE: 100.00 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...
Upon review of his Officer Selection Brief (OSB) and his Officer Selection Record (OSR) as it met the board, there were no errors shown. By such action, he would be ineligible for consideration by the FY02 Reserve Major Selection Board and would become a first-time eligible for the FY03 board. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 14 Sep 01.
In regards to the additional PME requirement, the applicant states that the policy was not in effect at the time of her promotion board and she should not be evaluated against a higher standard than her peers meeting the same board. ________________________________________________________________ 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, be considered...
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.
___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Support Division, Air Force Colonel Matters Office, AFCMOB, states that on 27 August 1999 the applicant requested voluntary retirement and simultaneously requested that SAFPC waive the required three years time- in-grade (TIG) and that he be allowed to retire as a colonel after having served only 25 months time-in-grade. Therefore, AFCMOB recommends the applicant’s request for retroactive...
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.