AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NUMBER: 97-03114
C33NSEL : NONE
HEARING: NO
The applicant requests that his promotion service date to t h e
grade of captain be changed from 8 August 1997 to 11 June 1997.
Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request
and provided an advisory opinion t 3 the Board recommending the
application be denied (Exhibit C ) . The advisory opinion was
forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D).
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, .w.e find insufficient evidence of
error or injustice to warrant corrective action. The facts a n a
opinions stated in the advisory op:nion(s) appear to be based on
the evidence of record and have ncc been adequately rebutted by
applicant.
Absent persuasive evidence applicant was denied
rights to which entitled, app-opriate regulations were not
followed, o r appropriate standards were not applied, we find no
basis to disturb the existing record. Accordingly, applicant's
request is denied.
- -
T h e Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision.
Applicant should also be infornea that this decision is final and
will only be reconsidered upon the presentation of new relevant
evidence which was not reasonabi.;v' available at the time t h e
application was filed.
Members of the Board Mr. LeRoy T. Baseman, Mi-. Gregory E.
Petkoff, and Mr. Patrick R. Wneeiei- considered this application
3n 2 G~11y 1998 in accordance x i z k ne provis-ions of Air Force
Instruction 36-2603, and the verr,i g statute, 10, U.S.C. 1552.
c,
(7
LERC'I' T . BASZMAN
Pane 1 C h a 1 r
Exhibits :
A. Applicant Is DD F o r m 149
€3. Available Mastex- Personnel gecords
E . AFBCMR Lt r Foi-wa:--c,! rig A d l : ~ sz:-)- ? p i r i o n
A d v i s o r y O p i n l o r i
I ? .
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C l . The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). _- T h e Board staff is directed to i n f c ~ r n applicant of chis decision.
I 4 By letters dated 7 August 1997, 26 October 1997, 9 December 1997, and 16 February 1998, applicant requested reconsideration of his He provided copies of documentation submitted with his appeal. 3 AFBCMR 91-01962 JAJM recommended that the Board deny the applicant's request: (1) on the basis that it is untimely; (2) on the merits; and ( 3 ) because it does not meet the criteria for reconsideration. Applicant contends that his SF Form 88, Report of Medical Examination, dated 16 August...
98-00223 AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Deputy Director of Customer Assistance, ARPC/DR, reviewed this application and states that the member states that when he received the RCSBP information it was close to his Continuous Active Military Service Date and he incorrectly interpreted the suspense date to be 90 days from that date. 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...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request that his records be corrected to reflect award of the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit D). After careful consideration of applicant's request that his records be corrected to reflect award of the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to...
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...
1 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 applicant’s records were forwarded to the appropriate office to have those awards and decorations to which he is entitled added to his DD Form 214. We recommend disapproval of the applicant’s request for the Air Force Longevity Service Award and Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon to be added to his DD Form 214.
Advise applicant of the decision of the Board,the right to a personal appearance with counsel and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR. ORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. The Board concluded the misconduct described in the applicant’s record warranted the General characterization.
Applicact's s u b x i s s i o ~ is at Exhibit Ti. The appropriate Air Force off;re evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory o p i n i o r . Appiicant's resporse to the advisory opinion is at Exhibit E. l2ursuar.t ts the 2 o a r d ' s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigatlon, Washington, D .
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: - The AFBCMR Chief Medical Consultant reviewed this application and is of the opinion that no change In the records is warranted and the application should be d e n i m . *at Based on the medical evidence provided, the IPEB found her condition nad stabilized and recommended thar she be removed from the TDRL and permanently retired w i t h a 40% disability rating. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated Exhibit D .