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.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02690 INDEX CODE 110.02 100.06 COUNSEL: No HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The narrative reason for her discharge and her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed so she can reenlist. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant's military records (Exhibit...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02692 INDEX CODE: 12.05, 128.05 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be reenlisted in the Air Force effective 15 Aug 00 for a period of 6 years so that he may receive a tax-free Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) payment. _________________________________________________________________ AIR...
The applicant was never recommended for or placed on the TDRL; he was medically discharged from active duty with severance pay.] _________________________________________________________________ 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 not discharged from active duty with entitlement to severance pay on 22 Sep 9, but on 23 Sep 99 his name was placed on the Temporary Disability Retired...
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, 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 Mrs. Barbara A. Westgate, Mrs. Carolyn J. Watkins, Mr. Clarence D. Long, III, considered this application on 11 April 2001. Panel Chair Attachment: Ltr, AFPC/DPPRS, dtd 8 Jan 01 AFBCMR 00-02703 INDEX CODE: 110.00 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF...
In support of the appeal, applicant submits a personal statement, a statement from the rater explaining how he was improperly influenced to rate the applicant lower than he deserved, and advising that the lower ratings were based on factors other than duty performance. The applicant appealed the contested report under the provisions of AFR 31-11 and the appeal was considered and denied by the Officer Personnel Records Review Board (OPRRB). It is further directed that his corrected report...
Current Air Force promotion policy (AFI 36-2502, Table 2.2, Rule 5, Note 2) dictates that before a decoration is credited for a specific promotion cycle, the close-out date of the decoration must be on or before the promotion eligibility cutoff date (PECD), and the date of the DECOR-6, Recommendation for Decoration Printout (RDP) must be before the date of selections for the cycle in question. This decoration does not meet the criteria for promotion credit during the 00E7 cycle, because...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief Medical Consultant, AFBCMR, reviewed this application and states that the applicant was first seen for psychiatric problems in 1994, essentially exhibiting the same symptoms as were later found to be unfitting for continued service, obsessive-compulsive and depressed mood disorders with suicidal ideation. This is the reason why an individual can be found unfit for service at a certain level,...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02718 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214 be corrected to show he was awarded the Purple Heart (PH) Medal. DPPPR states that there is no evidence in the applicant's records nor did the applicant provide any documentation that he had been injured and treated as...
___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: The Chief Medical Consultant, AFBCMR, reviewed this application and recommended that the Board either grant the applicant’s request and award a disability separation with 10% disability for degenerative disc disease, mild, rated under VASRD Code 5293, Intervertebral Disc Syndrome or, direct that a special review be accomplished by the Disability Branch to review all pertinent information relating to...
The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force. As of this date, this office has received no response (Exhibit D). We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of this case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim...
No evidence of reprisal is provided, nor did any reprisal action seem to exist. A complete copy of the DPPPE evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In his initial response to the advisory opinions, the applicant indicated that the original EPR provided was the smoking gun in this case. He believes that he has provided sufficient information to demonstrate that the report was...
Members of the Board, Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Mr. E. David. Hoard, and Mr. Albert F. Lowas, Jr. considered this application on 31 October 2001. AFBCMR 01-02734 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 announced, and it is directed that: The pertinent...
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 00-02736 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 C). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.
On 7 Jan 00 he signed an Aviation Continuation Pay (ACP) agreement and incurred an active duty service commitment date (ADSC) of 29 Sep 15. Any misunderstanding the applicant had concerning deadlines associated with the ACP was due to a failure on his part to read the associated instructions, and does not constitute an error or injustice on the part of the Air Force. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion...
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: 00-02744 INDEX NUMBER: 131.01 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her officer selection record (OSR) that met the calendar year (CY) 1999B Lieutenant Colonel Promotion Board be corrected to include her Medical Board Certification and the citation for the Meritorious...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant, reviewed this application and states that the applicant’s records do not support his contention that his disability resulted from a service-incurred injury, and the disability evaluations performed following the single reported incident of a seizure were appropriate as was the decision to discharge him for unfitness without eligibility for disability compensation. The member...
The total agreement payment amount is divided by the total length of the agreement in days (360 days per year) to arrive at a “daily rate.” This daily rate is then multiplied by the number of days served under the agreement to arrive at the amount of ACP the member has “earned.” Based on the “daily rate,” members receive the annual payment at the beginning of the agreement year with the member “earning” the payment over the course of the year. A complete copy of the DFAS-POCC/DE evaluation...
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Chief, Special Actions/BCMR Advisories, HQ AFPC/DPPD, also reviewed this application and states the medical disability evaluation system is used to determine if the service member’s medical condition renders him fit or unfit for continued military service. They further state that under military disability laws and policy, the boards can only rate those medical conditions which make the member unfit 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). 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.
AFBCMR 00-02757 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...
According to JPPSO, the JFTR stipulates that DITY moves requiring transoceanic transportation are not authorized. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C). RITA S. LOONEY Panel Chair AFBCMR 00-02758 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 directed that: The pertinent...
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.
On 9 December 1998 he received a PCS to XXXX AFB, XXX. As of this date, no response has been received by this office. Although the applicant was reassigned to XXXX AFB, he chose not to relocate his family because of inadequate health care for his son.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02767 INDEX CODE: 136.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be reinstated in the grade of lieutenant colonel (0-5) as a retired member of the Air Force Reserve with full eligibility for retirement benefits in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. Applicant’s complete submission is...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02770 INDEX CODE: 137.04 (DECEASED) COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) election be changed from spouse only coverage to spouse and children coverage, based on full retired pay. With respect to the question concerning the recoupment of premiums for spouse only...
She indicated on her DD Form 1299, Application for Shipment and/or Storage of Personal Property, that her shipment would contain professional items. In support of her request applicant provided a memorandum from the Quality Assurance office; her excess cost rebuttal adjudication letter; DD Forms 139, Pay Adjustment Authorization; DD Form 1299; AF Form 767, Extended Active Duty Order; and, Notification of Indebtedness letter. ...
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.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02775 INDEX CODE: 100.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code and reason for separation be changed so that he can go back into the Air Force. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Military Personnel Management Specialist,...
Therefore, at the time of his PCS the member’s weight allowance for the shipping of HHGs was 4,225 pounds, plus 1,100 pounds of UB. There has been no evidence submitted to show that he informed the destination site that his shipment exceeded the weight allowed for the shipping of his HHGs, nor did he request to have his shipment reweighed. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02780 INDEX CODE: 110.00 APLICANT COUNSEL: None SSN HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Applicant requests his reenlistment eligibility code (RE) be changed to allow him entry into the Air National Guard (ANG) _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 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.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02782 INDEX CODE: 102.00 COUNSEL: Randall D. Huggins HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be reinstated as an officer in the United States Air Force Reserve (AFRES) and retain his rank of first lieutenant. In the absence of clear-cut evidence that the applicant was ill-advised concerning his career field,...
AFBCMR 00-02784 INDEX NUMBER: 135.02 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...
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). Applicant's response to the advisory opinion 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.
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.
Members of the Board, Mr. Robert W. Zook, Mr. Robert S. Boyd, and Mr. Edward C. Koenig, III, considered this application on 23 January 2001. Panel Chair Attachment: Ltr, JPPSO/CC, dtd 21 Dec 00 AFBCMR 00-02794 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...
___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant indicates that the applicant had a known diagnosis from his years of active duty, which remained quiescent for some 8 or 9 years before causing significant problems. Therefore, DPPD recommends the applicant’s request be denied (Exhibit D). The applicant’s medical records indicate that there were no unfitting conditions that would disqualify him for worldwide military...
AFBCMR 00-02797 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...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Field Operations Branch, AFPC/DPSFM, reviewed the application and states that in accordance with Title 10 USC 701, members cannot sell more than a cumulative total of 60 days leave during a military career. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...
AFBCMR 00-02800 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, Mr. Christopher Carey and Mr. Dale O. Jackson considered this application...
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 00-02803 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: SSAN: 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. Members of the Board Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Mr. Christopher Carey, and Mr. Dale O. Jackson, considered this application on 4 January 2001. DONNA PITTENGER Deputy...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02805 INDEX NUMBER: 110.02; 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His separation code and reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C (Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service) be changed to allow him to enlist in the Air...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). 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. Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.