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. Applicant's submission is at
Exhibit A.
Applicant- ' s military personnel records were destroyed by fire ir:
1973. Therefore, the facts sui-ro7xiding his separ-ation from the
Air Force cannot be verified.
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 .
The advisory opinion was
forwarded to the applicant fox- review and response (Exhibit C ) .
Applicant's response to the advisory opinion is at Exhibit E .
After careful consideration of- applicant I s request, we note that
there are no records to review and although applicant has
provided a statement explaining his service assignment, he has
not provided documentation revealing the cir-cumst ances of his
discharge. Based on the presumption of regularity In the conduct
of government affairs and without evidence to the contrary, we
must assume that the applicant's discharge was proper and in
compliance with appropriate d i i - e c t i v e s .
Therefort->, we f i n d no
basis upon which to favorably consider this appl icat ion.
Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.
T h e Board staff is directed to inform applicant of t:his decision.
Applicant. should also be informed that this decision is final and
will only be reconsidered upon the presentation of new relevant
evidence whi-ch was not reasonably available at the time the
applicatlon was filed.
Members of the Board Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Ms. Rita J.
Maldonado, and Ms. Peggy E. Gordon considered this application on
7 January 1999 in accordance w i t h the provisions of Air Force
Instruction 36-2603, and the govei-riIng statute, 10, U.S.C. 1552.
+------4
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Panel Chair
J'
Exhibits:
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
B. Advisory Opinion
C . Applicant ' s Response
On 4 Sep 97, the applicant was requested to provide a copy of his Travel Voucher for TDY to verify that he was in the Area of Responsibility for Operation Desert Shield/Storm (Exhibit C) . Further, DVA stated that the applicant was separated from the Air Force in Apr 91, shortly after his return to Italy from the Persian Gulf, and had no need to save TDY orders or a PERSCO (Personnel Readiness and Deployment Teams) statement (see Exhibit H). Insufficient relevant evidence has been...
-...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). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). c. On 14 Jul98, the applicant was again requested to provide a copy of the recommendation package, with a copy of the DECOR-6, and informing him it was the applicant’s responsibility to h i s h all documentation to substantiate his claim.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Office of Personnel Program Management, HQ AFPC/DPPAES reviewed this appeal and states that applicant should have been extended from 9 April 1996 to 30 January 1998. Instead, he should be extended beginning 10 April 1996 and ending on 30 January 1998, compensated as discussed in the advisory opinion (with no pay for the period 7 June to 11 July 1996) , and allowed to extend for one promotion cycle beyond his projected HYT date. He received no pay and allowances...
After careful of applicant’s zsquest and the available evidence csrsid3ra:icn sf z z c a r d , -;;z find no evidence :hat the applicant’s d i s c k z r g e :hias A7c7,” 2°F L , afz3.f ~s-~siaering the facts zxd circumstances l e a d i r i g zz z r ~ e a p ~ l i z z r - : ’ s separation and -:-Fw of the fact t k L a t , ~::z;e: c u r r e r , t standards, the applica:? iliamond, Member Ms. Sophie A. \:;ark, Mernber F i l l members v o t e d to correct the records, as recommended.
Based on input from the Retraining Section at AFMPC, the applicant received approved CAREERS retraining into AFSC 115x0 (which was authorized a Zone A, Multiple One-Half SRB) on 4 February 1993, prior to his reenlistment in AFSC 361x1. DPMAPE recommended denial of the applicant's request to have the recouped SRB reinstated. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E).
His records be purged as follows: All nonselections be deleted; his separation be voided; and his records be corrected to reflect constructive active duty service as appropriate. On 5 Aug 96, the Board considered and denied the applicant's requests that his nonselections for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel be set aside; and, that he be directlv promoted to the grade of lieutenant colonel, or afforde; "effective" Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration (see AFBCMR 93-01960,...
Air Force officer promotions are a competitive process. A complete copy of this evaluation is appended at Exhibit H. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the advisory opinions and indicated that his rating chain tried to have the duty title updated in the personnel system before the OPR became a matter of record. He asks the Board to correct his record to reflect selection to major as if selected in the promotion zone by the CY95 Major Board.
In support, applicant provides, ir- part, a reaccomplished E P K , his similar appeals submitted under AFI 36- 2401, and statements from the contested report s indorser and commander. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we are not persuaded that the contested EPR should be replaced or that his RE code should be changed. Neither the applicant nor the evaluators have submitted persuasive evidence specifically demonstrating why the contested report is...
f. Applicant is not eligible for the Air Force Good Conduct Medal because there is a letter of denial in his records, a letter denying him reenlistment because of his conduct, and he had an Un- favorable Information File (UIF). DEPARTMENT OF THE A I R FORCE HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE PERSONNEL CENTER RANDOLPH AIR PORCE BASE TEXAS HQ AFPCDPPPRA 550 C Street West Ste 12 Randolph AFB TX 78150-4714 3 March 1998 This is in partial response to your 13 Feb 98 Application for Correction of Military...
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 97-00744 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF 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: rtment of the Air Force be corrected to show that on 4 November 1996, but on that date, his enlistment of 5 November 1990 was extended for a period of 61...