ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 97-03260
INDEX NUMBER: 108.04
COUNSEL: NY DIV OF VET AFFAIRS
HEARING DESIRED: NO
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be permanently retired for disability retroactive to 30 June 1976.
___________________________________________________________________
RESUME OF CASE:
On 18 June 1998, the AFBCMR considered and denied a similar appeal
(Exhibits A through E).
On 29 June 1998, the applicant submitted a request for reconsideration
of the Board’s decision through his Congressman (Exhibit F). After
reviewing the documentation submitted, the determination was made that
it did not meet the criteria for reconsideration. Accordingly, his
request for reconsideration was denied (Exhibit G).
On 27 October 1998, applicant’s counsel submitted a request for
reconsideration, through applicant’s Congressman (Exhibit H).
Following a review of the request, which contained essentially the
same information reviewed by the Board when the case was initially
considered, the determination was made that it did not meet the
criteria for reconsideration (Exhibit I).
In a 22 March 1999 letter to the Acting Secretary of the Air Force,
applicant and his counsel requested reconsideration of the Board’s
decision. In addition to documentation previously provided, the
applicant furnished information associated with medical treatments
received between 1995 and 1998 (Exhibit J).
___________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
After careful consideration of the evidence of record and counsel’s
most recent submission, we find that no evidence has been presented
showing that, at the time of applicant’s separation, the diagnoses
made by competent medical authority and applicant’s subsequent removal
from the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) were either improper
or based on erroneous information. In addition, no evidence has been
presented that would lead us to believe that the applicant’s rights to
due process were violated during the disability processing. In view
of the foregoing, and in the absence of persuasive evidence that the
applicant was improperly evaluated, the ratings assigned at the time
of his removal from the TDRL were erroneous, or that he was denied
rights to which entitled during the disability processing, we are
unpersuaded that a revision of our earlier determination is warranted.
___________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice;
that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and
that the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of
newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this
application.
___________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in
Executive Session on 21 June 1999, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Charles E. Bennett, Panel Chair
Mr. John T. Dorsett, Member
Mr. Steven A. Shaw, Member
The following additional documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit F. Letter from C/M McNulty, dated 2 Jul 98, w/Letter
from Applicant, dated 29 Jun 98, w/atchs.
Exhibit G. Letter from SAF/LLI to C/M McNulty, dated 3 Sep 98.
Exhibit H. Letter from C/M McNulty, dated 28 Oct 98, w/Letter
from NY Div of Vet Affairs, dated 27 Oct 98,
w/atchs.
Exhibit I. Proposed Response to C/M McNulty.
Exhibit J. Letter from NY Div of Vet Affairs, dated 22 Mar 99,
w/atchs.
CHARLES E. BENNETT
Panel Chair
On 29 June 1998, the applicant submitted a request for reconsideration of the Board’s decision through his Congressman (Exhibit F). Accordingly, his request for reconsideration was denied (Exhibit G). Exhibit G. Letter from SAF/LLI to C/M McNulty, dated 3 Sep 98.
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1996-02869A
Applicant’s complete statement, with attachment, is at Exhibit F. ___________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Medical Consultant, BCMR, reviewed applicant’s most recent submission and opined that no change in the records is warranted and the application should be denied. From evidence presented both at removal from the TDRL and current examinations, the applicant’s physical disability clearly does not warrant a change in...
Applicant’s complete statement, with attachment, is at Exhibit F. ___________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Medical Consultant, BCMR, reviewed applicant’s most recent submission and opined that no change in the records is warranted and the application should be denied. From evidence presented both at removal from the TDRL and current examinations, the applicant’s physical disability clearly does not warrant a change in...
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AUG 1 8 1998 IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00214 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for service during World War 11. CHARLES E. BENNETT Panel Chair 2, AFBCMR 98-00214 DEPARTMENT O F THE AIR FORCE HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE PERSONNEL CENTER RANDOLPH AIR FORCE BASE TEXAS MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR FROM HQ AFPCLDPPPRA 550 C Street West Ste 12 Randolph AFB...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2001-00580A
The applicant’s complete review is at Exhibit K. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL HQ USAF/JAA EVALUATION: HQ USAF/JAA reiterates that the applicant’s original debt of $50,669.90 was reduced to $25,669.90 and, to the extent that his reconsideration request was for the repayment of this validly established debt owed to the US, it should be denied. DFAS summarizes the applicant’s indebtedness and adjustments thereto as follows: $50,669.90 Original...
On 12 Jul 95, the Board considered and denied his request for reconsideration (Exhibit N). On 22 Dec 98, the AFBCMR responded to the general’s letter (Exhibit P) and the applicant’s case was forwarded for reconsideration of his appeal. Applicant’s numerous assertions that the reviewer of the contested OER was unduly influenced by the rater’s last statement on the contested report regarding his promotion potential which resulted in his receiving a “2” rating are duly noted.
_________________________________________________________________ The applicant has submitted a letter, dated 15 October 1997, requesting that she receive a direct promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel as if selected by the Calendar Year 1994 (CY94) Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board. Applicant’s numerous contentions concerning the statutory compliance of the central selection boards, illegal Officer Performance Report (OPR) restrictions, a tainted Promotion Recommendation...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1995-02111A
_________________________________________________________________ The applicant has submitted a letter, dated 15 October 1997, requesting that she receive a direct promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel as if selected by the Calendar Year 1994 (CY94) Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board. Applicant’s numerous contentions concerning the statutory compliance of the central selection boards, illegal Officer Performance Report (OPR) restrictions, a tainted Promotion Recommendation...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-1986-02531-3
SIXTH ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-1986-02531 INDEX CODE: 110.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 28 Dec 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. After again reviewing this application and the additional evidence provided in support of the applicant's appeal, it is the Board's opinion that favorable...
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the regular Air Force on 22 Mar 95, in the grade of E-3. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed this application and recommended no change in the applicant’s records. AFPC/DPPD’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S...