RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 00-00395
INDEX CODE 108.01 108.02 137.01
XXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None
XXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: If Needed
Applicant requests that a Medical Evaluation Board find her late
husband unfit for duty so that he could be awarded an early medical
retirement under the Reserve Transition Assistance Program (RTAP).
[This would have made him eligible to participate in the Survivor
Benefit Program (SBP) upon transfer to the Retired Reserve].
Applicant's submissions are at Exhibit A.
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). As of this date, this
office has received no response.
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 documentation provided with this case was sufficient to give the
Board a clear understanding of the issues involved and a personal
appearance, with or without legal counsel, would not have materially
added to that understanding. Therefore, a hearing was not required.
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, Ms. Patricia D. Vestal
and Mr. Joseph A. Roj considered this application on 14 December 2000
in accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-2603,
and the governing statute, 10, U.S.C. 1552.
Panel Chair
Exhibits:
A. Applicant's DD Form 149 & Ltr dtd 22/3/00, w/atchs
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinions
D. SAF/MIBR & AFBCMR Ltrs Forwarding Advisory Opinions
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant's 27 Mar 95 request for an honorable discharge on 5 Nov 96. 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).
It appears that the responsible officials applied appropriate standards in effecting the separation, and we do not find persuasive evidence that pertinent regulations were violated or that applicant was not afforded all the rights to which entitled at the time of discharge. Under our broader mandate and after careful consideration of all the facts and circumstances of applicant's case, the majority of the Board is persuaded the applicant has been a productive member of society. Applicant's...
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 and counsel 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 appropriate Air Force office evaluated the request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit G). The applicant’s response to the advisory opinion is at Exhibit I.
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). 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.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01140 INDEX NUMBER: 137.01; 128.14 (DECEASED) COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES Applicant requests that his deceased father’s records be corrected to show that the deceased’s widow is entitled to an annuity under the Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP). The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board...
IN THE MATTER OF: AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: 96-0182 pt"u'2 5 1398 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING: NO The applicant requests that he receive a regular retirement under the 15 year Reserve Transition Assistance Program (RTAP) program and that he be retired in the grade of master sergeant ( E - 7 ) which was the highest grade held. The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinions to the Board...
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.
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). Members of the Board, Mr. Gerald B. Kauvar, Ms. Marcia J. Bachman, and Mr. Roger E. Willmeth, considered this application on 3 Aug 00 in accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-2603 and the governing statute,...
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, within 30 days (Exhibit D). The applicant’s response to the advisory opinion is at Exhibit E. After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant...