Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9702318
Original file (9702318.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
. 

. 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NUMBER:  97-02318 

COUNSEL:  NONE 

HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

- 

Applicant requests that his records be corrected to reflect that 
he  was  considered for promotion  to  the  grade  of  senior master 
sergeant  (E-8) for the 9538 cycle.  'Applicant's submission is at 
Exhibit A. 

The  appropriate  Air  Force  office  (AFPC/DPPPWB)  evaluated 
applicant I s  request and provided an initial advisory opinkon 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. 
Pursuant  to  the  Board's  request ,  AFPC/DPPPWB  provided  an 
additional  advisory  opinion  to  the  Board  (Exhibit F). 
The 
additional  advisory opinion was  forwarded to  the  applicant  for 
review and response  (Exhibit G ) .   As  of  this date, no response 
has been received by this office. 
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 facts and 
opinions stated in the advisory opinions appear to be  based  on 
the evidence of record and have not been adequately rebutted by 
applicant. 
Absent  persuasive  evidence  applicant  was  denied 
rights  to  which  entitled,  appropriate  regulations  were  not 
followed, or appropriate standards were not applied, we  find no 
basis to disturb the existing record. 
Accordingly, applicant's request is denied. 

The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision. 
Applicant should also be informed that this decision is final and 
will only be reconsidered upon the presentation of new relevant 
evidence  which  was  not  reasonably  available  at  the  time  the 
application was filed. 

Members  of  the  Board  Mr.  Michael  P.  Higgins,  Mr.  Patrick  R. 
Wheeler, and Mr. William E. Edwards considered this application 

on  1 Dec 98 
Instruction 36-2603 and the governing statute, 10 U.S.C.  1552. 

in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  Air  Force - 

Panel Chair 

Exhibits : 
A.  Applicantis DD Form 149 
B.  Available Master Personnel Records 
C.  Advisory Opinion 
D. 
E.  Applicant's Response 
F.  Additional Advisory Opinion 
G. 

SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion 

SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0001046

    Original file (0001046.doc) Auto-classification: 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 appropriate Air Force office evaluated the request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit G). The applicant’s response to the advisory opinion is at Exhibit I.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9900102

    Original file (9900102.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's requests and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant’s last two known addresses for review and response (Exhibit D). After careful consideration of applicant's remaining requests and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant further corrective action.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9800709

    Original file (9800709.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Funds allotted for payment of air mechanics are continued i n force u n t i l authorization for increased grades is received and conversion made i n compliance w i t h instructions above mechanics ratings t o noncommissioned grades is based on the fund8 allotted In t o the Air Corps f o r air mechanics grades within t h e present fiscal year. SUBJECT: TO : ,Appointment of' Air Mechanics t o Grades' Cammanding Generals, Army Air Forces, Army Ground Forces, Services of Supply, Armies, Army...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 0000233

    Original file (0000233.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on 24 Mar 00 for review and response. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Medical Consultant, AFBCMR, reviewed this application and indicated that, he is of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9701189

    Original file (9701189.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force o f f i c e evaluated applicarit ‘ s request ana provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit Z The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D ) . T r. 0 additional evaluation was forwarded to applicant f c r re-Jie+; ar,d comment (Exhibit G ’ i . Applicant’s response to the additional evaluation is at Exhibit H. The appropriate After careful consiaeratio~ cf applicant's r e q u e...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9900220

    Original file (9900220.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (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, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0003379

    Original file (0003379.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be granted on the basis of clemency, if a check of his Federal Bureau of Investigation, (FBI) record proves negative (Exhibit C). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). Applicant should also be informed that this decision is final and will only be reconsidered upon the presentation of new relevant...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802285

    Original file (9802285.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-02285 INDEX CODE: 131.00, 131.05 APPLICANT COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His grade be corrected from technical sergeant (E-6) to master sergeant (E-7), effective 2 September 1945. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 0000008

    Original file (0000008.doc) Auto-classification: 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). Available Master Personnel Records C. Advisory Opinion D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion E. Applicant’s Response DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE PERSONNEL CENTER RANDOLPH AIR FORCE SAS MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR 31 January 2000 FROM: HQ AFPC/DPPPR 550 C Street West Ste 12 Randolph AFB TX 78150-4714 SUBJECT:...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-01236

    Original file (BC-2007-01236.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Amendment SO ACD-00565, dated 26 January 2007 pertaining to applicant's placement on the temporary retired file, effective 20 January 2007 reflects he retired in the projected higher grade of SSgt. The applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, after reviewing the evidence of record we agree with the opinions and recommendations 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 of an...