AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
JUL 141998
IN THE MATTER OF:
.-
I
DOCKET NO: 9 8 - 0 0 6 0 8
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
Applicant requests that the wording "Disability Severance Pay" in
Items 18 (Remarks) and 2 8 (Narrative Reason for Separation) on
his DD Form 2 1 4 be removed.
Applicant's submission is at
Exhibit A.
The appropriate Air Force off ices evaluated applicant s request
and provided advisory opinion to the Board recommending the
application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were
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, 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 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. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Mr. Jackson A.
Hauslein, and Mr. Michael P. Higgins considered this application
on 9 July 1 9 9 8 in accordance with the provisions of Air Force
Instruction 3 6 - 2 6 0 3 , and the governing statute, 10, U.S.C. 1 5 5 2 .
4
/
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Panel Chair
Exhibits :
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinions
D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinions
t I AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 9 8 - 0 0 1 2 4 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO Applicant requests that he be awarded the Aerial Achievement Medal ( A A M ) , Fourth Oak Leaf Cluster, for his support in Humanitarian Operations for the period 7 Dec 9 2 to 22 Mar 9 4 . Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A. i- The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied. Applicant requests the Air Force Overseas Short Tour Ribbon be added to his records.
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR Z O R R 2 C T I O N OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF FRCCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER : 9 8 -- 0 0 9 9 6 CCUNSEL : None HEARING DESIRED: I'Jo Applicant requests that his genera;, under honorah1 e conditions, discharge be upgraded to honorable. T h e appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the applicati-on be denied (Exhibit B , I . Applicant's response to the advisory opinion is at...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Applicant requests award of the Legion of Merit, recommended 6 Sep 43, but never received. We recommend disapproval of the applicant's request to be awarded the Legion of Merit based on a World War 11 recommendation.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). 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. After careful review of the application and coordination with the 34gth Military Personnel Flight, Travis AFB CA, it was determined s - the award of the AAM...
(Exhibit C) The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit D) . Available Master Personnel Records C. ROP AFBCMR 95- 02984, dtd 11 Feb 97; Memorandum for the Chief of Staff, dtd 7 Oct 97 D. Advisory Opinion E. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion DEFENSE FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING SERVICE DENVER CENTER 6760 E, IRVINGTON PLACE DENVER, COLORADO 80279 DFAS-DE/FYCC MAR 1 9 1998 SUBJECT:...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). Members of the Board Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Ms. Mary C. Johnson, and Mr. Thomas J. Topolski Jr. considered this application on 9 May 2001, in accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-2603 and the governing statute, 10 U.S.C.
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 is requesting he be promoted to A3C (E-2) earlier than 1 Feb 55, the date he was promoted. The applicant enlisted 25 Aug 53 in the grade of Airman Basic (E-l), was promoted to A3C (E-2) 1 Feb 55, promoted to A2C (E-3) 1 Jun 56, promoted to A1C (E-4) 1 Sep 59 (A1C (E-4) redesignated Sgt (Ed)), and to SSgt (E-5) 1 Dec 68.
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 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, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action.
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 advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.