___________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The Air Force stated that the applicant elected child only SBP coverage based on full retired pay prior to his 1 Mar 73 retirement. They stated that a member who fails to provide SBP coverage for an eligible spouse at the time of retirement may not later elect coverage for that person, or another person of the same category, unless Congress authorizes an open enrollment. ...
She did not perform any IDT points during the R/R year 24 January 2001 through 23 January 2002. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES 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 and that the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with...
In support of his application, the applicant submits a copy of the EPR in question along with the revised EPR, a supportive statement from his rater and additional rater and a copy of the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) decision. _________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: A majority of the Board finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be denied. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Personnel Records.
___________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Documentation provided by the applicant indicated that while on active duty he was selected for promotion to the grade of captain with a projected date of rank of 23 Dec 98. He is currently serving in the Reserve grade of captain having been promoted to that grade, effective 1 Oct 00. Exhibit C. Letter, HQ ARPC/DPB, dated 1 Oct 02.
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 31 July 2002 the applicant was released from active duty in the grade of technical sergeant with an effective date of promotion of 2 May 2002 and retired in the same grade on 1 August 2002. Consequently, since the effective date of promotion determines eligibility to receive pay and allowances in that grade, the applicant would not be entitled to back pay and allowances as requested. ...
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to his discharge are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS reviewed the application and recommends denial. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case and we agree with the opinion and...
The following is the only known information pertaining to the applicant's service and was extracted from the partially reconstructed record and from documents provided by the applicant. However, he would be thankful if the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council would consider awarding him the Air Medal for his combat duty over Europe in 1943 and to reconsider the Purple Heart request. We believe that his back injury sustained in June 1943 was due to the forced aircraft bail-out which...
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The Air Force stated that the applicant was married and elected child only SBP coverage based on full retired pay prior to his 12 May 83 disability retirement. If a member withdraws under this provision, there is no immediate refund of premiums; however, applicable spouse premiums paid by the member can be refunded to the spouse following the member’s death. ...
After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we find no impropriety in the characterization of the applicant's discharge. Likewise, since we have determined favorable consideration of the applicant’s request for a discharge upgrade is not appropriate at this time, his request for his RE Code to be changed is not possible. ___________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 26 March...
Consequently, the number of security forces statements may have forced his former commander to impose punishment on him regardless of whether he was telling the truth. The applicant appealed only the severity of the punishment, not the nonjudicial punishment action itself. The applicant has not provided any evidence showing that the imposing commander or the reviewing authority abused their discretionary authority, that his substantial rights were violated during the processing of this...
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to his discharge are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS reviewed the application and recommends denial. DPPRS states that the applicant provided no facts warranting an upgrade of his discharge. Therefore, based on the...
He was retired from the Air Force before he married his former spouse, and against his request, she is receiving his SBP benefits. At that time he requested his former spouse be removed from the SBP and that the applicant be designated as the eligible spouse beneficiary when she gained eligibility. Applicant’s letter is at Exhibit D. On 24 March 2003, a copy of a USAF/JAG evaluation regarding former spouse requests for SBP coverage was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment.
On 3 March 1954, the Air Force Discharge Review Board denied his request for a discharge upgrade. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to his discharge are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS states that the applicant was facing a possible court-martial for submitting a false travel claim. After noting the comments provided by the Air...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03249 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. Substance abuse personnel, and his squadron commander and first sergeant all agreed that Track 4 would not really help him because he had not admitted that he...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03208 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. In a legal review of the discharge case file, the staff judge advocate found it legally sufficient and recommended that the applicant be discharged from the...
AFMAN 36-8001, Reserve Personnel Participation and Training Procedures, does not apply to the ANG, the component to which he belonged at the time he performed the 48 IDT periods. The remaining 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 at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFRC/FMF recommends the...
On 14 April 2000, the applicant, who had an established date of separation (DOS) of 25 April 2000, reenlisted in the Regular Air Force for a period of 4 years, thereby establishing a new DOS of 13 April 2004. The AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit C. __________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant responded by stating that on his AF Form 1411, Extension of Enlistment in the Regular Air Force, it reflects that he was...
It would be in his best interest if this Board considers him eligible after 20 years of faithful service. DPP states that the applicant did not complete 20 years of satisfactory service as required by Title 10, U.S.C., Section 12731; therefore, he is not eligible for Reserve retired pay at age 60. As the Air Force office of primary responsibility indicates, the applicant had the opportunity to complete his service before he requested discharge since he could have continued to participate...
The board recommended that he be discharged from the service for misconduct because of a civil court disposition with an undesirable discharge. The remaining 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 at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied. DPPRS...
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Information extracted from the applicant’s master personnel record indicates that effective 1 October 2002, applicant retired in the grade of major general with 25 years, 1 month and 21 days of active service for retirement and 37 years, 10 months and 21 days of service for basic pay. In view of the above, we recommend that the applicant be afforded relief by correcting his record as indicated below. ...
AFBCMR 02-03655 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 military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to xxxxxxxxx, be corrected to show that on 13 June 2002, she enlisted in the Air...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03792 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His discharge date of 28 February 1979 be changed to 15 March 1979. A copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF...
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to applicant’s court-martial and non-judicial punishments, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLSA/JAJM recommends the application be denied. While the applicant believes a bad conduct discharge was harsh based on the fact he was a first-time offender, we...
On 28 May 1993, the discharge authority approved the recommended separation and directed that the applicant be discharged from the Air Force with service characterized as under other than honorable conditions. On 28 November 1995, the Air Force Discharge Review Board considered and denied his request for a discharge upgrade. While it is true that the applicant had compiled an outstanding service record prior to the events that led to his separation, we believe his wrongful use of marijuana...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-04028 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed from 4E to 1J. We agree with the opinion of the Air Force office of primary responsibility that the RE code which was assigned at the time of his separation accurately reflects the...
INDEX CODE: 131.00 AFBCMR 02-04059 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...
INDEX CODE: 121.03 AFBCMR 02-04094 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...
Members of the Board Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Ms. Kathleen F. Graham and Mr. James W. Russell III considered this application on March 4, 2003. JOSEPH A. ROJ Panel Chair Attachment: Ltr, HQ USAF/RE, dtd Feb 5, 2003, W/Atch AFBCMR 03-00320 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...
AFBCMR 03-00497 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 military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to xxxxxxxxxx, be corrected to show that eighteen (18) days of annual leave were...
Based on his second nonselection for promotion, he was considered and not selected for continuation by the CY02B Continuation Board. Although the applicant's commander and other officers who have served with the applicant support continuation, the applicant's record supports the continuation board's decision to not offer him continuation. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air...
INDEX CODE: 128.00 AFBCMR 03-00749 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 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...
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. Charles E. Bennett, Mr. William H. Anderson and Mr. James Russell, III considered this application on 23 April 2003. CHARLES E. BENNETT Panel Chair Attachment: Ltr, ARPC/DPB, dated 27 Mar 03 AFBCMR 03-00840 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF...
Members of the Board Mr. Charles E. Bennett, Mr. William H. Anderson and Mr. James W. Russell, III considered this application on 23 April 2003. CHARLES E. BENNETT Panel Chair Attachment: Ltr, ARPC/DPB, dtd 1 Apr 03, w/Atch AFBCMR 03-00847 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...
INDEX CODE: 135.02 AFBCMR 03-00934 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 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...
INDEX CODE: 112.05, 112.03 AFBCMR 01-00883 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 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...
The sentence was suspended for good behavior. A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit E. In an undated application, the applicant again submits a request that his discharge be upgraded to general. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: In earlier findings, the Board determined that there was insufficient evidence to warrant an upgrade of the applicant’s discharge based on clemency.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC 2003 00064 2
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00064 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to honorable. Applicant did not file within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552 and Air Force Instruction 36- 2603. Exhibit B.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-1984-03852A
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-1984-03852-2 INDEX CODE: 100.07 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: In his request for reconsideration, he requests his records be corrected to show he was disenrolled from basic pilot training for some reason other than “flight...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-1988-02856A
Applicant further states that if the Board does not find direct promotion appropriate, she then asks for SSB consideration for the 1994 through 1997 promotion boards based on the Berkley v. US court decision, which addressed a section of the Memorandum of Instruction (MOI) that was presented to the selection boards. After reviewing the prior Board decisions and the additional documentation provided, we still are not persuaded that the applicant has been denied fair and equitable...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-1988-02973A
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-1988-02973 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). Accordingly, the applicant’s request for award of the DFC is not favorably considered. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-1989-01497A
In a letter, dated 23 December 2002, the applicant was advised that inasmuch as his request contained essentially the same request that was previously considered and denied by the Board and he had provided no new relevant evidence, it did not meet the criteria for reconsideration by the Board (Exhibit H). After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the additional documentation submitted by the applicant, we are not persuaded that a change to his characterization of service...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-1990-01087
The letter, dated 6 June 1996, be removed from his records. In an application, dated 15 February 1990, he requested the following: a. Furthermore, since the reports were matters of record at the time of his promotion consideration by the P0597A and P0698B selection boards, we also recommend he receive promotion consideration by SSB for these selection boards.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-1991-01020-2
On 6 August 1991, the applicant’s request to have his bad conduct discharge upgraded to honorable was considered and denied by the Board. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit G. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation Report Number 792606C dated 13 June 2003, the applicant has had no other convictions since those events cited in the report at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: In...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-1991-02414A
For a further accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the application, and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit G. In a letter, dated 1 August 1995, the applicant requested reconsideration of his application and provided additional documentation (Exhibit H); however, in a letter dated 8 October 1997, he was advised that his request did not meet the criteria for reconsideration by the Board (Exhibit I). In letters, dated...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-1992-01286A
______________________________________________________________ RESUME OF CASE: On 11 March 1993, the Board considered and denied the following requests from the applicant (Exhibit XX): a. Specifically, the applicant asserts that the senior rater’s statement provides sufficient grounds for amending the PRF prepared on him for the CY91A Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board and his consideration for promotion to lieutenant colonel by special selection board. Letter, Applicant, dated 16...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-1992-02488
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 92-02488 (Case 4) APPLICANT COUNSEL: Mr. Louis P. Font HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, he requests that he be retroactively reinstated to active duty, effective 1 January 1993, with entitlement to all back pay and allowances and subsequent in the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-1992-02488A
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 92-02488 (Case 4) APPLICANT COUNSEL: Mr. Louis P. Font HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, he requests that he be retroactively reinstated to active duty, effective 1 January 1993, with entitlement to all back pay and allowances and subsequent in the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-1992-02647a
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 92-02647 INDEX CODE 110.02 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, he asks that his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C (Involuntarily discharged with an honorable characterization or entry-level separation with no characterization of...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-1992-02928A
After reviewing the statement from the current CMSAF, the majority of the Board is not persuaded that the relief requested should be approved. The former Chief of Staff of the Air Force (CSAF) approved a recommendation to award the applicant, the former Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force (CMSAF), the DSM as an exception to policy at that time. Upon being apprised that he lacked approval authority; that the DSM was only awarded to general officers, and that no enlisted members of...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-1993-00751A
A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit E. The applicant submitted a letter dated 23 February 1996, again requesting that his general discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 9 November 2002, the applicant submitted a DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States, again requesting that his discharge be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ The following...