RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 97-02439
INDEX CODE: 136.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. His retired pay be corrected to reflect 10% increase for heroism pay
for receipt of the Soldier’s Medal in World War II.
2. He be awarded all back pay retroactive to his date of retirement, 1
September 1955.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The reasons the applicant believes the records to be in error or unjust and
the evidence submitted in support of the appeal is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the
applicant's military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the
appropriate office of the Air Force. Accordingly, there is no need to
recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Technical Branch, Retired Pay Operations, DFAS-CL, reviewed the
application and states that the applicant was approved for the additional
10% by the Awards Branch. Final Secretarial action was taken in 1955 to
award the applicant the additional 10% in retired pay with the notation
made to the retirement order. The applicant was authorized the 10% from
retirement date, therefore, there is nothing in his record to correct.
Based on member’s application for the records correction, they will correct
his account retroactive to 9 August 1991, six years from the date that he
submitted his request for the records correction. They have no record of
an earlier inquiry from the retiree to warrant payment prior to that date.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant
on 15 December 1997, for review and response. As of this date, no response
has been received by this office.
_________________________________________________________________
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. The records indicate that final
Secretarial action was taken in 1955 to award the applicant the additional
10% in retired pay for extraordinary heroism with the notation made to the
retirement orders. Therefore, he was entitled to the additional 10% based
on extraordinary heroism but because of the statute of limitation the
Defense Finance and Accounting Service - Cleveland (DFAS-CL) could not
reimbure him for the period 1 September 1955 to 8 August 1991. DFAS-CL
states that it would take 4 years and 3 months of active duty pay to
reimburse him the $15,748.58 that he is entitled to. The only way the
Board knows to correct this injustice is to continue the applicant on
active duty until 30 November 1955 and retire him on 1 December 1959.
Therefore, we recommend the applicant's records be corrected to the extent
indicated below.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating
to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that he was not retired from the Air
Force under the provisions of AFR 39-20 on 1 September 1955, but was
continued on active duty until 30 November 1959, on which date he was
released from active duty and voluntarily retired effective 1 December
1959.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive
Session on 9 March 1999 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Terry A. Yonkers, Panel Chair
Mr. Clarence D. Long III, Member
Ms. Rita J. Maldonado, Member
Ms. Gloria J. Williams, Examiner (without vote)
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The following
documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 9 August 1997, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letters, DFAS-CL, dated 10 October 1997,
28 November 1997, 23 December 1998, and
2 February 1999.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 15 December 1997.
TERRY A. YONKERS
Panel Chair
AFBCMR 97-02439
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:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that he was not retired from the
Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-20 on 1 September 1955, but was
continued on active duty until 30 November 1959, on which date he was
released from active duty and voluntarily retired effective 1 December
1959.
JOE G.
LINEBERGER
Director
Air
Force Review Boards Agency
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1997-02439
Based on member’s application for the records correction, they will correct his account retroactive to 9 August 1991, six years from the date that he submitted his request for the records correction. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that he was not retired from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-20 on 1 September...
On 2 December 1997, the MPF provided a retirement estimate of $1,483 per month to the applicant. They produced a retirement pay estimate of $1,391, a difference of $7 from the applicant’s actual retired pay. At the time the applicant was considering retirement, the MPF provided him with an estimate of his retirement pay.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Chief, Retirements Branch, Directorate, Personnel Program Mgmt, AFPC/DPPRR, reviewed this application and states the estimate the applicant received on 2 December 1997 clearly states “the dollar amount shown below is an estimate of your retirement pay.” This document also directs members to “Contact DFAS-CL for official retired pay estimates.” There is no evidence the applicant ever consulted that agency. They produced a...
A copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit C. The appropriate Defense Finance and Accounting Service off ice evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit D). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit E). requested .
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00122
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00122 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He receive the ten percent annual retired pay increase he qualified for by being awarded the Airmans Medal (AmnM) for heroism. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit...
On 16 October 1957, applicant was discharged in the grade of airman basic, under the provisions of AFR 39-18 (Court Conviction), and received a bad conduct discharge. We conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances. We also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency.
On 16 October 1957, applicant was discharged in the grade of airman basic, under the provisions of AFR 39-18 (Court Conviction), and received a bad conduct discharge. We conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances. We also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency.
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member who was discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge on 7 October 1958, under the provisions of AFR 39-16 (Discharge for inaptitude or unsuitability - other reasons) and Letter, Department of the Air Force, dated 1 December 1955, “Discharge of Airmen During Their First Enlistment.” He had served 2 years and 5 months on active duty. It appears that...
(Exhibit D) In an application dated 29 August 1990, the applicant requested that (1) he be promoted to master sergeant (E-7), (2) he be reinstated into active duty, (3) the time out of the service be counted towards retirement, (4) he receive all back pay and allowances, and (5) the portion of his Selective Reenlistment Bonus, which was recouped, be reimbursed. On 16 July 1991, the Board considered and recommended granting the applicant’s request for a service retirement from the Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1994-04682
(Exhibit D) In an application dated 29 August 1990, the applicant requested that (1) he be promoted to master sergeant (E-7), (2) he be reinstated into active duty, (3) the time out of the service be counted towards retirement, (4) he receive all back pay and allowances, and (5) the portion of his Selective Reenlistment Bonus, which was recouped, be reimbursed. On 16 July 1991, the Board considered and recommended granting the applicant’s request for a service retirement from the Air Force...