Members of the Board, Mr. Henry Romo, Jr., Mr. Clyde L. Williams and Ms. Anne-Cecile McDermott considered this application on 15 November 2001. Letter, HQ ARPC/DPPPR, dtd 14 Sep 01, W/Atchs. AFBCMR 00-02367 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 Records is...
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.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a statement from the Saint Francis Healthcare System of Hawaii, copies of his statements of earnings, several invoices, a certification for incapacitation pay, statements of lost wages, income tax form, medical documentation, and an AF Form 348, Line of Duty Determination. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating 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). 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 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.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02383 INDEX CODES: 131.01, 131.09 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His late father’s records be reconsidered for promotion to major based on the removal of his Officer Effectiveness Report (OER) rendered for the period 1 Apr 67 through 19 Nov 67; and, his father be posthumously promoted to the...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02389 INDEX CODE: 134.00 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) imposed on 30 Jun 00, be set aside. His only official Permanent Change of Station (PCS) duty was to complete certain outprocessing items prior to...
A complete copy of the submission is at Exhibit A. The member must provide documentation to support the injury was as a direct result of enemy action and that he received medical treatment by medical personnel for said wound. A complete copy of the advisory is at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and in rebuttal submitted a statement from a former soldier...
In support of his request, the applicant submitted new evidence in the form of a personal statement from a medical corpsman indicating he treated the applicant for wounds he received during the battle of Hill 700 in Bourgainville in 1944 (Exhibit G). _________________________________________________________________ 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 awarded the Purple Heart...
The applicant stated he was not advised of the proper ADSC until after graduation; however, the AF Form 63 he signed on 21 August 1997, prior to his AFIT start date of 2 September 1997, clearly stated the ADSC he would incur as a result of completing an AFIT degree program. 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 Air Force office and adopt their rationale as the basis for our...
They state that the Military Personnel Flight's (MPF) inclusion of an IEB on the applicant's supplemental enlistment agreement was an administrative error and is not legally binding as he was not authorized to receive an IEB in the 1N431 AFS. In response to the Board's request, the General Law Division, HQ USAF/JAG reviewed the application and recommended the request be denied. __________________________________________________________________________ ______________________ THE BOARD...
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 to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.
Neither the policeman who performed CPR nor the responding doctor found any sign that the child was choking on her bottle or that she had vomited, as claimed by the applicant. The cause of death, in the opinion of the doctor, was injuries to the child’s brain. A review of the medical records convinced the doctor that the cause of applicant’s daughter’s injuries was a severe and violent shaking.
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: 00-02417 INDEX CODE: 108.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His honorable discharge be changed to reflect medical retirement. The Medical Consultant states that the applicant provided a partial copy of a letter written by his eye doctor that seems to indicate some weight contribution from his...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02420 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Bronze Star Medal (BSM) and the Air Medal. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant's...
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.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02425 (Cs #3) INDEX CODE 131.01 131.09 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His nonselection by the Calendar Year 1998C (CY98C) Judge Advocate General (JAG) Colonel Selection Board be voided and he be afforded consideration by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the CY98C board comprised of all...
Members of the Board Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Ms. Peggy E. Gordon, and Mr. Frederick R. Beaman III. THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ Vice Chair Attachment: Ltr, JPPSO-SAT/CC, dtd 20 Dec 00, with attachment AFBCMR 00-02426 INDEX CODE: 128.14 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...
However, we note that although the Air Force is required to rate disabilities in accordance with the DVA Schedule for Rating Disabilities, the DVA operates under a totally separate system with a different statutory basis. Whereas, the Air Force rates a member's disability based on the degree of severity at the time of separation. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 3 October...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02432 INDEX CODE: 128.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be reimbursed for travel expenses incurred from a permanent change of station (PCS) from Kadena, Japan to Keesler AFB, MS. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The reasons the...
He was considered and selected for early retirement by the Fiscal Year 1992 (FY92) Selective Early Retirement Board (SERB). ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Retirements and Separations Division, AFPC/DPPRR, indicates that in accordance with Consolidated Base Personnel Office Letter 92-023 dated 11 march 1992, Subject: FY93 Captain/Major Selective Early Retirement Board (SERB), the member was properly identified for the FY93 SERB. ...
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.
_________________________________________________________________ DEFENSE FINANCE & ACCOUNTING SERVICE (DFAS) EVALUATION: The Chief, Claims Branch, DFAS-DE/FYCC, reviewed the appeal and advised that, during the period in question, the applicant was living in government housing and was entitled to receive basic allowance for housing-difference (BAH-DIFF), which is paid to members who are paying child support. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of...
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.
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of investigation, Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Military Personnel Management Specialist, Separations Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed this application and states that the applicant did not provide evidence of error in his discharge case. However since the discharge occurred over 43 years ago and...
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02452 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ RESUME OF CASE: On 27 May 1999, the Board considered and denied applicant’s request to upgrade his bad conduct discharge. A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit F. In a letter dated 27 March 1999, the...
His letters were available to selection boards and were, at the time of the boards, in his OSB. However, we do agree with the Air Force office of primary responsibility that the applicant’s officer selection briefs (OSBs) that met both promotion boards and the continuation board did in fact contain errors. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be...
On 9 Feb 01, the Board granted partial relief of his request and directed that his corrected record be considered for promotion to the grade of major by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the FY00 and FY01 Reserve of the Air Force Line and Nonline Majors Selection Boards; and, if not selected for promotion by either board, that he be considered for continuation by a Special Review Board (SRB) for the Air Force Reserve Major Selective Continuation Board, which convened on 6 March 2000. 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). 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). 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 evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 27 October 2000, for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit D). _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to...
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.
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 applicant’s response to the advisory opinions, with attachments, 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...
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.
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.
In support of the application, the applicant provides a personal statement, copies of PRF's and OSB's, a copy of the original and corrected training report (TR), memorandum of instructions to the CY97E and CY99A lieutenant colonel selection boards, the 14 Sep 98 and the 8 Mar 99 SSB's, her officer selection record (OSR) prepared 16 Nov 99, and other documents relative to the issue under review. ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 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). 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 instructions also state, “Officers will not be considered by a Special Selection Board if, in exercising reasonable diligence, the officer should have discovered the error or omission in his/her records and could have taken timely corrective action.” The applicant has not demonstrated he exercised “reasonable diligence” in getting the erroneous information corrected as is evidenced by a Report on Individual Person (RIP) he submitted that was dated 8 Jul 98. A copy of the Air Force...
The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant indicated that he contacted the office of primary responsibility (OPR) for the Air Force evaluation to clarify the recommendation to not allow the additional rater to rewrite the final bullet in section VII. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice. ...
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...
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 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...
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.
As a result, a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) convened on 2 June 2000 and referred the applicant to an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) based on the diagnosis of chronic prostatitis. An IPEB convened on 8 June 2000 and recommended the applicant be discharged with severance pay with a compensable rating of 10%, based on the diagnosis of chronic prostatitis with S1-S2 neuritis associated with low back pain, Veterans Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) 8530. ...
AFBCMR 00-02515 INDEX NUMBER: 113.04 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: XXXXXXXXXXX, 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 has submitted letters of support and recommendation from his command chain. The recommendation package for the subject AFAM was a late submission due to the unit’s extremely high operations tempo as indicated in the letter dated 22 June 2000 that provided for support of his request. JOE G. LINEBERGER Director Air Force Review Boards Agency AFBCMR 00-02517 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of...
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The military personnel flight (MPF) extended his enlistment based on a service commitment after graduation and failed to request a waiver of the service retainability required to attend the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) Academy. He further states that after 13 years in the Air Force this is totally unjust to him and the time he has dedicated to the Air Force (Exhibit E). ...
DPPPR indicated that the Purple Heart Medal is awarded for wounds received as a direct result of enemy action (i.e., gunshot or shrapnel wounds, hand-to-hand combat wounds, or forced aircraft bail out injuries). According to DPPPR, there was no evidence in the applicant's medical or personnel records which were provided that he had been injured as a direct result of enemy action. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 3 Nov 00.
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. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Ms. Peggy E. Gordon, and Mr. Frederick R. Beaman III considered this application on 30 January 2001. THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ Vice Chair Attachment: Ltr, HQ AFPC/DPPTR, dtd 19 Oct 00, with attachment AFBCMR 00-02529 INDEX CODE:...