RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 99-00390 Case #2
INDEX CODE 108.02
XXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: Paralyzed Veterans
XXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: No
Applicant requests his retired disability percentage be upgraded from
60% to 75% effective 1994 on the basis of unemployability and
severity. 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 and counsel for review and response (Exhibit D). Counsel'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 persuasively rebutted by applicant’s counsel.
Absent convincing 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. Vaughn E. Schlunz, Mr. Michael V. Barbino,
and Mr. Jay H. Jordan considered this application on 30 August 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
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinion
D. SAF/MIBR Ltrs Forwarding Advisory Opinion
E. Counsel'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 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 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 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 opinion appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant.
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant's request on 25 Oct 99 (Exhibit C). The AFDRB Brief 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.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-03193
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS His current reenlistment date of 29 Jul 08 be changed to a later date so that he may be paid a selective reenlistment bonus (SRB). The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-03193 in Executive Session on 13 Apr 11, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-02943
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS The applicant’s Coast Guard Achievement medal is on file in his SNCO Selection Record. The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-01701
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS The Commander, Air Force Reserve Command concurred and forwarded the request to the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) on 22 Jun 10. The applicant’s initial request for an extension of her MSD was received and processed in a timely manner.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-02418
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS We find no evidence which indicates the applicant’s service characterization, which had its basis in his court-martial conviction and was a part of the sentence of the military court, was improper or that it exceeded the limitations set forth in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Dec 10.
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’s counsel and 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.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-02950
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS The applicant does not provide any evidence of an error or injustice in reference to is RE code and HQ AETC/SGPS found his separation for enuresis appropriate and does not support his reentry into the Air Force. The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and the application will only be reconsidered upon the...