The AFPC/JA evaluation is at Exhibit L. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant's counsel reiterated his previous assertions and states that he disagrees with DPPD and JA that the applicant did not provide any new evidence. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel reviewed the additional advisory and provided a response which...
Based on the current mental health evaluation provided, the BCMR Medical Consultant states that the applicant would not be a good risk for return to active duty and his appeal for reinstatement should not be favorably recommended (Exhibit J). ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and commented that the testing and evaluation results from Wilford Hall verify that he is...
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-00105 (Case 2) COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: A waiver be granted for an exception to policy for retirement under the Fiscal Year 2000/2001 (FY00/01) Phase III Officer Early Retirement Program. Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit...
Too much emphasis was placed on a Letter of Admonition (LOA); there was bias by the additional rater; and, the number of days of supervision is incorrect. The HQ AFPC/DPPPEP evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPPWB stated that the first time the contested report was considered in the promotion process was Cycle 01E7 to master sergeant (E-7), promotions effective Aug 01 - Jul 02. However, they do not, in the Board majority’s opinion, support a finding that the evaluators were unable to...
A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit E. The applicant submitted an application dated 12 February 2002, again requesting that he be awarded the Vietnam Commendation Medal and the Vietnam Service Medal. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that he was awarded the Vietnam Service Medal for his service...
HQ AFRC/SGPA states in their memorandum, dated 13 July 2000, that they do not find any medical documentation in this request or from the applicant’s former Reserve medical unit which indicates she had a medically disqualifying condition at the time her commander took administrative action. However, at any prior time when she was over the maximum weight allowance, she always met body fat measurements. Exhibit E. Applicant, dated, 20 September 2000.
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-00739 INDEX CODE: 129.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, he requests that the grade of Sergeant be reinstated. The applicant’s request that the grade of sergeant be reinstated was considered and denied by the Board on 3 August 2000...
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-00957 INDEX CODE: 131.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, he requests that he be promoted to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the Calendar Year 1999B (CY99B) Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board. His complete submission,...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPWB addressed the supplemental promotion consideration issue should the applicant’s request be approved. DPPPWB stated that the first time the contested report was considered in the promotion process was Cycle 97E5 to staff sergeant (E-5), promotions effective Sep 97 - Aug 98. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Having...
They stated the evidence submitted by applicant proves the Air Force committed an error when it misadvised him about the time he would have to serve in the Air Force when executing a contract and recommended the relief be granted (Exhibit I). ___________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: After again reviewing this application, the new evidence provided in support of the appeal, and the evaluations prepared by AFPC/JA and HQ USAF/SG, a majority...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01985 COUNSEL: FRED L. BAUER HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Enlisted Performance Reports (EPRs) closing out 31 August 1997, 31 August 1996, and 31 March 1995 be removed; the denial of reenlistment be nullified and he be given full credit for the time since his forced separation toward retirement, with...
A complete copy of the HQ USAF/JAG evaluation is at Exhibit F. ANG/DPFP indicated that after an additional review of the applicant’s medical documentation, and based on the fact that the applicant was injured while on duty, even though he was disqualified medically for duty in Dec 98, the applicant should have been found LOD-Yes for his spinal injury. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department...
The AFBCMR has considered these previous cases: In an application dated 18 January 1965, the applicant, a captain, made the following request: The AF Form 77, USAF Officer Effectiveness Report (OER), for the period 1 August 1963 - 31 May 1964 be removed from his records. In an application dated 13 May 1972, the applicant, a major, made the following requests: a. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPO recommends the application be...
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02350 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, he requests award of the Purple Heart (PH) medal for injuries sustained during action on 8 January 1951 in support of the Korean War. The applicant’s complete submission, with...
Her husband’s date of discharge be corrected to reflect that he was discharged in 1946 versus 1950. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter(s) prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits C, D &E. Pursuant to the Board’s request for information, the FBI indicated that, on the basis of the evidence provided, they were unable to locate an arrest record pertaining to the former...
The applicant should submit a request for the removal of the Article 15 to the commander who directed that it be placed in his records. In addition, the majority of the Board is sufficiently persuaded that the Article 15 should also be removed from the applicant’s record. Based on the available evidence of record, I find no basis upon which to favorably consider this portion of the application, and strongly recommend you deny the majority’s recommendation to remove the contested Article 15...
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02892 INDEX CODE: 110.00 APPLICANT COUNSEL: NO SSN HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Since she did not receive the full requested relief in her 9 October 2000 application; she now requests reconsideration for 16 actions regarding her involuntary discharge. The erroneous label of "Personality...
AFBCMR 00-02973 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...
However, the applicant has indicated that she is ineligible to receive unemployment compensation from the state of Florida unless her DD Form 214 indicates that she was discharged to attend school full time. However, we believe the recommended correction to her record will provide her fitting relief since it will provide her an opportunity to apply for unemployment compensation. Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His nonselection was erroneous and unjust because he was forced to compete against officers who had unauthorized and illegal stratified “Top Promote” (TP) recommendations on their Promotion Recommendation Forms (PRFs). The PRF considered by the board had an overall recommendation of “Promote.” On 13 Mar 95, he voluntarily applied to separate under the provisions of the PALACE CHASE program. Even if...
AFBCMR 00-03211 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 Special Review Board and adopt that recommendation as the basis for our decision that the applicant has been the victim of either an error or an injustice. Therefore, the applicant’s records should be corrected as set forth in the accompanying Memorandum for the Chief of Staff. Members of the Board,...
If this had been a good year, he would have been eligible for the RRL when he was considered for separation [in 90] and his case would have been reviewed as a retirement-in-lieu-of- discharge case. The applicant’s military personnel records, to include documents pertaining to the administrative discharge board and the AF/DRB appeals, are provided at Exhibit B. JACKSON A. HAUSLEIN, JR. Panel Chair AFBCMR 00-03240 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the...
On 20 March 2001, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and granted applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge from general (under honorable conditions) to an honorable discharge and changed the narrative reason for discharge from Pattern of Misconduct - Failure to Pay Just Debts to Secretarial Authority. Therefore, the majority recommends that his reenlistment eligibility record be corrected to reflect...
On 18 July 2001, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s request for award of the PH. DPPPR states that to be awarded a PH a member must be wounded as a direct result of enemy action and must receive medical treatment by medical personnel. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 20 March 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chair Ms....
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: ON 25 April 2000, The applicant was offered nonjudicial punishment for conduct in violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 92, failure to obey an order, Article 128, assault, and Article 134, indecent language. On 2 August 2001, the applicant’s requests were considered and denied by the AFBCMR. _________________________________________________________________ The following members...
On 26 Jul 56, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied the deceased member’s request that his BCD be upgraded to honorable. JAJM defers to AF/JAG for an opinion on the issue of civil law on whether the applicant is a proper applicant to file an application for correction of the deceased’s military records. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 31 January 2002, under...
Except for the contested report and a 2 Dec 91 EPR having an overall rating of “4,” all of the applicant’s performance reports since Dec 90 have had overall ratings of “5.” Since the Article 15’s suspended reduction expired on 12 Aug 96, prior to the 31 Dec 96 Promotion Eligibility Cutoff Date (PECD) for promotion cycle 97E6, the Article 15 did not affect the applicant’s eligibility for promotion consideration to technical sergeant for that cycle. ...
This implies that he is two days short of meeting the requirement as an officer with over four years of enlisted active duty service when, in actuality, he has 1461 days of prior enlisted active duty service, which totals four years and one day exactly. The Director, AFRBA, continued by stating that the OPR advises that the applicant’s prior enlisted service was properly computed and recommends that the application be denied. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-00069 COUNSEL: WILLIAM M. FERRIS HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be promoted to the Reserve grade of colonel. By application, dated 13 Aug 02, the applicant provided additional documentary evidence for the Board’s consideration, which is attached at Exhibit...
The complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit F. _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant responded to the Air Force evaluations in two separate letters. In regards to the medals he is requesting, the applicant stresses that he wore all of the medals he is requesting while on active duty, but they were not entered into his records. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the...
He further requests that he receive the Vietnam Service Medal with two bronze service stars. Exhibit I. Applicant’s Letter, dated 24 October 2000, with attachments. Exhibit K. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 February 2002.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-00307 INDEX CODE: 131.09 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His retirement pay grade be changed from E-6 to E-7. On 27 Oct 97, after considering the matters presented by the applicant, the commander found that the applicant had committed one or more of the offenses alleged and imposed...
The Board directed that the applicant’s records be corrected to reflect that he was not released from active duty on 8 Mar 96 under the provisions of AFI 36-3209 (Misconduct), transferred to the Kansas Air National Guard on 2 Apr 96, discharged from the Kansas Air National Guard on 31 Jul 97, and assigned to the Retired Reserve on 2 Aug 97; but was continued on active duty until 31 Jan 99; and, that he was released from active duty on 31 Jan 99 for the Convenience of the Government...
He accepted the undesirable discharge so he could return home to work and help his family. The board found that the applicant was physically unfit for further military duty and recommended that the applicant be referred to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) for further evaluation. On 19 March 2002, a letter was forwarded to applicant and counsel suggesting that the applicant consider providing evidence pertaining to his post-service activities.
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). PHILIP SHEUERMAN Panel Chair Exhibits: A.
In an effort to afford the applicant full, yet fair, relief, we contacted the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS-DE) and they determined that in order to provide the applicant reimbursement for the cost incurred for the private term life insurance, he would need to be placed in a temporary duty (TDY) status for seven (7) days to Hanscom AFB, MA. Members of the Board, Mrs. Barbara A. Westgate, Mr. Joseph A. Roj, and Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., considered this application on 16...
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-00658 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, she requests her medical record be reassessed and her medical condition at the time of discharge be reevaluated based on differences between her military disability rating and subsequent...
The DOR was established as 1 Sep 00, per the Department of The Navy, Special Promotion Selection Board letter, dated 11 May 01 According to DPA, on 26 May 00, the applicant was appointed into the Air Force Reserve as a major IAW Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2005, Appointment in Commissioned Grades and Designation and Assignment in Professional Categories - Reserve of the Air Force and United States Air Force, Table 2.3, “Appointment Grade and Computation of TYSD, Date of Rank (DOR), &...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-00945 INDEX NUMBER: 110.00 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx COUNSEL: None xxx-xx-xxxx HEARING DESIRED: Yes ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Block 29 of his DD Form 214, “Dates of Time Lost During This Period,” be corrected to reflect “None.” His Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded. They recommend that his DD Form 214 be corrected...
AFBCMR 01-01021 INDEX CODE: 121.03 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...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-01027 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Purple Heart (PH) medal. He was awarded the PH by a general officer while he was in the hospital. He recently received a formal letter of presentation from the President of Korea which included the new ribbon and medal.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-01074 INDEX CODE: 131.05 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His date of rank (DOR) to second lieutenant (2Lt) be recalculated to provide 100% credit for the months he spent completing his degree in the Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT) Educational Delay Program (EDP). However, he...
He recommended that the applicant be discharged with a general discharge. That office states that, based upon the documentation in the file, they believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 9 May 01.
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 applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits C and D. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Inasmuch as the applicant’s training was conducted under United Sates Navy (USN) policy and guidance, HQ AETC/DOF requested...
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. Henry Romo, Jr., Mr. Albert F. Lowas, Jr., and Mr. John E. Pettit, considered this application on 14 June 2001. Panel Chair Attachment: Ltr, AFPC/DPSFM, dtd 18 May 01 AFBCMR 01-01081 INDEX CODE: 121.03 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF...
The Chief, Review Boards Office, SAF/MIBR, informed the applicant, by letter, dated 26 Jul 01, that the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC), St. Louis, Missouri, was unable to locate his personnel records. The Chief requested the applicant confer with his military personnel representatives for assistance in locating pertinent records and if he had other documents relating to his Air Force service other than the DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty), he...
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.
He was not discharged because of the failure. Based on applicant’s failure in his CDC’s and no record of misconduct, the SJA recommended that the applicant be separated from the Air Force with an honorable discharge without probation and rehabilitation. We therefore agree with the recommendations of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden that he has suffered either an error or an injustice.
Additionally, he provided no facts warranting a change in his separation code. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Assistant Chief, Skills Management Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, reviewed the applicant’s request and states the Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2C, “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service” is correct. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the...