4
L
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECOR3 3F PROCEEDINGS
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NUMBER: 97--03429
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING: NO
The applicant requests that the award of the Vietnam Campaign
Medal be added to his DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United
States Report of Transfer or Cischarge. Applicant's submission
is at Exhibit A.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request
and provided an advisory opin,on to the Board recommending the
application be denied (Exhibit T I . The advisory opinion was
forwarded to the applicant foz- 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 t h e
available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of
error or injustice to warrant xlrlrective action. The facts and
opinions stated in the advisory oFir,ion appear to be based cn the
evidence of record and have n3t been adequately rebutted- by
app 1 i can
Ive evidence applicant
was denied
rights
were not
app-opriate regulation
S
followed
we find no
ndards were not applied,
basis to disturb the existing record. Accordingly, applicant's
request is denied.
Absent persuas
,hich entitled,
appropriate sta
t.
to w
The Board staff is directed tc i n f o r m applicant of this decision.
Applicant should also be informec tnat this decisicn is final and
will only be reconsidered upon
t h e presentation of new relevant
evidence which was not reasonabibr available at the time the
appiicat ior, was filed.
Baseman, Mr. Gregory Ei.
Members of the Board Mr. L?Ro;l
Petkoff, and Mr. Patrick R. Wheelel- considered this application
on 2 J u l y 1998 in accordance with the provisions of Air Force
Instruction 36-2603, and
U . S . C . 1552.
'I?.
2225
i E1ra 11-
=--?
Exhibits :
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
B . A v a i 1 a k k Master 2ersonns- ReciIi-ds
C. AdxrI s c q Opinior
D . AFBC'MR Lt-1 Foiwc;l:-aLng ~ a ~ , - i s ~ i - y
, ? i n i o n
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.
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). 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.
discovered the absence of an AF E'orrr 63 in his records upon receipt of that RIP; however, that ;s irzelevant to The issue that h e i n c u r e d the A D S C . However, we do not find his uncorroborated contentions, in and by themselves, sufficiently compelling to conclude that he unwittingly incurred an ADSC for training he would not have accepted had he been aware of the ADSC prior to entering the training. Exhibit B.
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 .
AF | DRB | CY2006 | FD2005-00213
L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge. The applicant contends that the discharge action was improper because he should have been discharged by Sheppard AFB rather than Keesler AFB. Applicant's Issues.
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit F , The Chief Medical Consultant, AFBCMR, review the application and states that records clearly show the applicant was fit for duty through all the years of his active duty service, and, while having some residual problems relating to his Korean War experiences, he was well and able zo perform his dEties up to the time of h i s retirement, He is being compensated appropriately by the DVA for his service-connected, but not unfitting,...
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 facts surrounding applicar-z ' s separation f r o x the Air Naticrdl Guard and A i r Force Reserve are m k n o w n inr.srnucli as the discharge correspondence is not available. T h e appropriate Air Force o f f I C E ?--aluated applicant Is request ar,d z 1 p r c m i d e a ar, advisory o p i n i s a t h e Board recommerLdir~: t h e was application be denied (Exhicx 13 . AvaAable Master Personnel Recgl-3s C. Advisory Opinion D. E. Applicant I s Response F. AFBCMR L t r to Applicant, d t...
AF | DRB | CY2006 | FD2005-00153
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD r c 1 ) (HGH SRA) .i 1. SERVICE UNDER REVIEW: ;>. DC 20693 DD FORM 293.