AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE MATTER OF:
--
c
-
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
]
Her name be changed f
r
o
!{! 18 1998
DOCKET NUMBER: 9 - 932
COUNSEL : NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She did not graduate from high school but wanted to join the
service. She used her sister's high school diploma and birth
certificate to enlist into the Air Force.
In support of the appeal, the applicant provided a personal
statement, a statement from her husband, and other documentation.
Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Military personnel records of
' .were destroyed by
fire in 1973 at the National Personnel Record Center, NPRC.
Therefore, the facts surrounding her separation from the Air
Force cannot be verified.
enlisted in
The available records reflect tha
the Regular Air Force in 1949 and on 1 0 August 1949, she
graduated from basic training at Lackland AFB, Texas.
On 13 May 1950, she received a certificate of proficiency as a
general radio mechanic at
On 12 December 1952, she was honorably discharged in the grade of
airman first class.
AFB,-
L
97-02932
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
viewed this application
The Staff Judge Advoca
t
who
and states that it was
name appears on all
served in the
thout a preponderance
military records
of evidence to the contrary, we must assume the military records
reflecting Air Force service by applicant's sister are correct.
To change the records without a preponderance of the evidence
would deny applicant's sister of her veteran's benefits as well
as her place on the Women's Memorial. Because applicant has the
burden of proof, she needs to put forth some corroboration of her
claim, reliable evidence from an unbiased source such as her
sister, or a disinterested third party with first had knowledge.
Therefore they recommend denial of applicant's request.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at
Exhibit C.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant submitted a letter, with attachments (social
security card & a set of fingerprints) requesting a 60-day
extension to respond to the advisory opinion.
Applicant's request is attached at Exhibit E.
Based on the submission of the set of fingerprints, The Board
forwarded the fingerprints to the Federal Bureau of Investigation
for a comparison. Fingerprints submitted were compared to U.S.
s currently on file in the CJIS Division on
and found to be the same individual.
A complete copy of their response is attached at Exhibit F.
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
~
~~
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing
law or regulations.
2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
3. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice. After
ted with this appeal, we are
reviewing the
persuaded that
did actually serve in the Air
Force. As noted by the Staff Judge Advocate, to change the
records without a preponderance of the evidence would deny
applicant's sister of her veteran's benefits. Prior to rendering
a decision on this appeal, we obtained verification of the
2
4
97- 02932
fingerprints of the applicant and the FBI found the fingerprints
on file to be the same. In addition, a check with the Veteran's
Administration revealed no claims had been filed by applicant's
sister. In view of the above, we are certain that the applicant
served in the Air Force during the periods in question and
recommend the military records be changed accordingly.
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
to reflec
the Air Force
be changed
The following members of the Board considered this application in
Executive Session on 2 5 qune 1 9 9 8 and 8 September 1998, under the
provisions of AFI 36- 2603:
Ms. Patricia J. Zarodkiewicz, Panel Chair
Mr. Jackson A. Hauslein, Member
Ms. Dorothy P. Loeb, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 September 1997, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/JA, dated 9 January 1 9 9 8 .
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 27 January 1 9 9 8 .
Exhibit E. Applicant's Response, undated, w/atchs.
Exhibit F. FBI Report, dated 11 May 1998, w/atchs.
Panel Chair
3
I
I
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
WASHINGTON, DC
J
Office of the Assistant Secretary
AFBCMR 97-02932
DEC 18 I998
MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF
I
1
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:
.
of the Department o
be changed to reflect
of
, ...
Air Force Review Boards Agency
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1997-02986
On 19 May 97, applicant was advised of her commander’s intent to impose nonjudicial punishment upon her under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for her alleged misconduct in violation of Article 134 for the following offense: at or near McGuire AFB, on or about 29 Apr 97, being disorderly in that she engaged in a verbal tirade and threw a handful of dental instruments out a doorway. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On...
On 19 May 97, applicant was advised of her commander’s intent to impose nonjudicial punishment upon her under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for her alleged misconduct in violation of Article 134 for the following offense: at or near McGuire AFB, on or about 29 Apr 97, being disorderly in that she engaged in a verbal tirade and threw a handful of dental instruments out a doorway. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02383
For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding both the AFDRB and AFBCMR decisions, and the rationale of the earlier decisions, see the Record of Proceedings (ROP) at Exhibit E. Subsequent to the AFBCMR decision, the applicant’s sister, having been appointed conservator of his estate, has submitted an application on behalf of her brother, requesting reconsideration. __________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered...
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a statement from the rater, statement from the CAP Administrator, the contested report, reaccomplished report, and the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board application, w/atchs. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Chief, Appeals and SSB Branch, Directorate of Personnel Program Management, HQ AFPC/DPPPA, reviewed the application and states that in comparing the contested OPR with the previous 13 February 1995,...
ACC/JA found the file legally sufficient for removal from promotion action. In this case, the commander was within his authority to request promotion delay and removal. The removal action appears to be supported by the evidence of record and we find no basis upon which to conclude that it was unjust or inappropriate.
Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A. On 30 Sep 99, applicant’s supervisor did not recommend her for reenlistment due to the referral EPR. A complete copy of the their evaluation, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and provided a five-page letter responding to the advisory opinions.
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD01-00282A
CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD01-00282-A GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable and for a change in the Reason and Authority for the discharge and the RE Code. In her submission to the DRB, the applicant states her belief that she was not given sufficient opportunity to overcome her “financial situation” The DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant’s discharge was appropriate given the nature of the...
On 19 May 97, an MEB found the applicant not world-wide qualified and recommended she be referred to an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB). He diagnosed her as having a personality disorder, not otherwise specified, and recommended administrative separation. On 9 Nov 98, the IPEB found her fit with an adjustment disorder which existed prior to service (EPTS) at the USAFA and recommended she be returned to duty.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01540
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01540 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On 16 August 2004, the servicemember was provided the opportunity to respond to the FBI investigation within 14 days (Exhibit E). ...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02418
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 0202418 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded so he can be buried in a national cemetery. AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant's sister...