RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-02935
INDEX CODE: 131.05, 102.06
APPLICANT COUNSEL: None
HEARING DESIRED: No
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her Mandatory Separation Date (MSD) of 1 May 2001 be changed to correlate
with five years from the date of pin-on to Colonel versus her Date of
Rank (DOR).
___________________________________________________________________
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 are 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 Director of Personnel Program Management, ARPC/DPP, reviewed this
application and recommended denial. A complete copy of the evaluation,
with an amendment, is at Exhibit C.
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and furnished a response,
which is at Exhibit E.
___________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or
regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
3. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of probable injustice. After reviewing all the evidence
presented, we believe approval of some form of relief is appropriate. As
was noted by the Air Force, the applicant received incorrect information
concerning her existing MSD and made critical career decisions based on
the erroneous information. While we are aware that arbitrarily extending
the applicant’s MSD is not possible since such action would be a
violation of law, we believe the applicant can be afforded effective
relief which would not be contrary to law by correcting her records in
the following manner.
___________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that her date of rank (DOR) to
the grade of colonel, Reserve of the Air Force, is 8 August 1999 and her
mandatory separation date is 8 August 2004.
___________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in
Executive Session on 2 June 2000 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chair
Mr. Charles E. Bennett, Member
Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The following
documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 February 2000, with
attachments.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letters, ARPC/DPP, dated 31 March 2000 and
25 April 2000.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 14 April 2000.
Exhibit E. Letter from the applicant, dated 17 April 2000.
DAVID C. VAN GASBECK
Panel Chair
AFBCMR 98-02935
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 her date of rank (DOR) to
the grade of colonel, Reserve of the Air Force, is 8 August 1999 and her
mandatory separation date be changed accordingly.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Director of Personnel Program Management, HQ ARPC/DPP, stated that the member began drawing Air Force Reserve retired pay effective 5 Aug 93, his 60th birthday, until his death on 18 Jul 98. A complete copy of this evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and...
Based on the audit, the applicant's R/R was changed from 2 October to 14 June. The applicant was notified on 17 April 1999 about the change in his R/R date and that his points were being realigned to coincide with the 14 June R/R date. DPP further states the applicant was notified of the change in his R/R year date in April 1999 and he received an AF Form 526 for RYE 13 June 1999, and furthermore, the applicant had adequate time to earn points for the RYE 13 June 2000.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02091
He was contacted in Jul 76 that he was to be administratively discharged from the Air Force Reserve (ISLRS). The evidence of record indicates that the applicant was assigned to ISLRS on 30 Sep 74 and was eventually discharged from the Air Force Reserve on 9 Feb 78 after a prolonged assignment in ISLRS. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be...
On 2 June 2000, the applicant was notified he was selected for continuation on the Reserve Active Status List. On 18 Sep 00, the applicant signed an AF Form 131, Application for Transfer to the Retired Reserve, requesting a retirement effective date of 30 Apr 01. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant responded to the Air Force evaluation and reiterated that the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03845
Counsel further asserts that because the instruction cited in the reprimand imposed on the applicant under Article 15 was not in effect at the time of the applicant’s alleged misconduct and there was no paragraph 5 as referred to, the reprimand was in error and constituted an erroneous basis for the discharge action subsequently initiated against the applicant. Counsel also asserts that the reprimand imposed on the applicant under Article 15 admonishes the applicant for misconduct that the...
In order to establish eligibility for Reserve retired pay under the provisions of Title 10, United States Code, Section 12731, a member must complete 20 years of satisfactory service with the last 6 years of qualifying service in a Reserve component. Although he completed sufficient points for his full R/R year ending 11 September 2000, to be satisfactory, he died prior to completion of the 20th year. On the date of his death, the deceased member had sufficient points for a year of...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00137
His commander received an informal email in late November 2002 requesting that an Officer Performance Report (OPR) be prepared for the February 2003 major board. Since he is no longer a member of the Air Force Reserve as a result of the two nonselections, he is not eligible for consideration by a Reserve promotion board. All of the officers selected for promotion by the FY03 board had completed SOS and 94% of the officers selected by the FY04 board had completed SOS.
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 98-01156 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO Dpoc16W Applicant requests that his mandatory separation date (MSD) of 1 December 1999 be adjusted to 1 December 2003 to allow for time he was assigned to the Inactive Status List Reserve Section (ISLRS). The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01265
In reviewing the service member's record he had 19 years of service at the time of his death. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force and adopt their rationale as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain her burden that she has suffered either an error or an injustice. Therefore, the applicant is not eligible to receive RCSBP annuity based on...
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The reasons applicant believes he has been the victim of an error and/or an injustice are contained in his complete submission, which is at Exhibit A. The Officer Verification Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPAOR, also reviewed the case and provided a technical advisory pertaining to the DOR computation. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his DOR...