RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 99-00332
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
Applicant requests that his records be corrected to reflect a total of
51 combat mission flights during WWII, his overseas service be
annotated on his Report of Separation, the Air Medal with 9 Oak Leaf
Clusters be reflected on his Report of Separation, and that his date
of birth on the 1948 Report of Separation be changed from 17 September
1917 to 17 September 1916. Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A.
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). As of this date, no
response has been received by this office.
With regard to applicant’s date of birth, we noted that his available
military personnel records reflect 17 September 1917 as his date of
birth. In the absence of evidence to corroborate applicant’s
assertion that the year should be 1916, we are unpersuaded that
corrective action is appropriate at this time.
As to applicant’s request concerning his combat flights, overseas
service and award, after careful consideration of his 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 opinion 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. Henry Romo Jr., Mr. Laurence M. Groner, and
Mr. Patrick R. Wheeler considered this application on 21 October 1999
in accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-2603,
and the governing statute, 10, U.S.C. 1552.
HENRY ROMO JR.
Panel Chair
Exhibits:
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinion
D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). After careful consideration of applicant's request that his records be corrected to reflect award of the Navy Meritorious Unit Citation and AFGCM (1OLC) and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit B). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (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.
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were 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 B). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (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.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 01-01773 INDEX CODE 107.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No Applicant requests his DD Form 214 reflect his participation in Operation Urgent Fury (Grenada) and receipt of the appropriate award. 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...
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, within 30 days (Exhibit D). The facts and opinions stated in the advisory opinion appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-00226 INDEX CODE: 100.05 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be returned to his Primary Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) of Security Forces Specialist (3PO51). As a result, he was approved for retraining into Personnel (3S0X1), an AFSC he did not request. ...
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). 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 within 30 days (Exhibit D). The facts and opinions stated in the advisory opinion appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant.