RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02059
INDEX NUMBER: 131.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
Applicant requests that his Date of Rank (DOR) for airman first class (A1C)
be corrected from 26 November 1990 to 12 February 1990, his rank of senior
airman (SRA) be corrected from 25 July 1992 to 12 October 1991, his rank of
staff sergeant (SSgt) be corrected due to loss of points for promotion
testing because of the SRA DOR error, and that he given supplemental
promotion consideration to technical sergeant (TSgt). 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, 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 corrective action. The facts and opinions stated in the advisory
opinion appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been
adequately 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 available at the time the application was filed.
Members of the Board, Mr. Henry Romo Jr., Mr. Laurence M. Groner, and Mr.
John E. Pettit, considered this application on 26 October 2000 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, w/atchs
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinion
D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
E. Applicant's Response
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.
Based on the findings of the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) and the applicant’s apparent strong desire to serve his country the Board believed the applicant should be afforded the opportunity to apply for a waiver to enlist in the armed services. A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit H. On 15 May 1999, applicant submitted his statements, Letter, 2BW/JA, dated 30 August 1995, letters of appreciation and recognition, and copies of his records, and his...
Based on the findings of the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) and the applicant’s apparent strong desire to serve his country the Board believed the applicant should be afforded the opportunity to apply for a waiver to enlist in the armed services. A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit H. On 15 May 1999, applicant submitted his statements, Letter, 2BW/JA, dated 30 August 1995, letters of appreciation and recognition, and copies of his records, and his...
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 opinions 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 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.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-02148 INDEX NUMBER: 131.04 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His date of rank and effective date of promotion to the grade of senior airman (SrA) be changed from 11 May 1998 to 28 February 1998. DPPPWB stated the basic eligibility criteria for promotion to senior airman (SrA) is not be...
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 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). 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 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.