RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02008
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her Mandatory Separation Date (MSD) be extended to 24 years.
_________________________________________________________________
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 Superintendent, Medical Accessions and Personnel Programs, AFPC/DPMAF2,
reviewed the application and states that the manning in applicant’s Air
Force Specialty Code (AFSC) at Keesler AFB is 100%, slightly above the Air
Force manning level of 100%. After her second nonselection, she accepted
continuation to remain on active duty for length of service retirement.
She is scheduled for a Medical Evaluation Board and the results will be
referred to an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) to determine
whether she is physically fit for return to duty. However, if returned to
duty, the board will result in a continued restriction from assignment
outside of the Continental United States. The justification presented does
not meet the criteria of AFI 36-2501, Officer Promotions and Selective
Continuation. Therefore, they recommend the application be denied.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant
on 1 September 2000, for review and response within 30 days. However, as
of this date, no response has been received by this office.
_________________________________________________________________
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 error or injustice to warrant adjusting the
applicant’s MSD to 1 July 2001. In this respect, we note that while on
active duty, the applicant acquired a Hepatitis C infection. However,
based on her MSD of 1 December 2000, she will be forced to retire prior to
completing her 12-month chemotherapy treatment. In support of her request,
applicant’s Group Commander has provided a statement indicating that her
MSD should be extended until 1 July 2001 to continue her chemotherapy
treatment. In view of this statement, we recommend her records be
corrected to the extent indicated below. However, we find no basis upon
which to recommend extending her MSD to allow completion of 24 years of
service.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown
that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to
our understanding of the issue(s) involved. Therefore, the request for a
hearing is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating
to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that:
a. On 9 November 2000, she requested a waiver of her Mandatory
Separation Date (MSD) and her request was approved by competent authority
pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 14701(b), thereby
establishing a new MSD and retirement date of 1 July 2001.
b. She was not released from active duty on 30 November 2000 and
retired for length of service on 1 December 2000, but on that date she
continued on active duty in the grade of major.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive
Session on 9 November 2000, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Panel Chair
Mr. Clarence D. Long, III, Member
Ms. Marcia J. Bachman, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The following
documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 24 Jul 00, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPMAF2, dated 3 Aug 00.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 1 Sep 00.
WAYNE R. GRACIE
Panel Chair
AFBCMR 00-02008
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:
a. On 9 November 2000, she requested a waiver of her Mandatory
Separation Date (MSD) and her request was approved by competent authority
pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 14701(b), thereby
establishing a new MSD and retirement date of 1 July 2001.
b. She was not released from active duty on 30 November 2000 and
retired for length of service on 1 December 2000, but on that date she
continued on active duty in the grade of major.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03109
In fact, due to an administrative error, she continued to serve beyond her MSD of 1 June 2006 and was only separated after the error was discovered. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant disagrees with NGB’s opinions and has provided numerous points of contention along with explanations for each. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we can find no documented instance...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02008
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02008 INDEX CODE: 131.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 29 DEC 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The test scores from cycle 07E7 be removed from his records and that he be allowed to retest. They state if the applicant felt the environmental condition of the classroom was...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01524
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/DPA recommends that partial relief be granted indicating that it would be in the interest of justice to correct the applicants records to reflect her 1 Oct 11 MSD was waived and that she was retained in the Reserve until 1 Apr 12,...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02335
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02335 INDEX CODE: 125.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be changed to show the time he spent from 1 February 1992 through 20 February 1995 was actually a break in service and not time spent in the Non-obligated, Non-participating Ready Personnel Section (NNRPS) from 1...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02600
His time retained in the Inactive Status List Reserve Section (ISLRS) from 19 Aug 96 to 30 Sep 02 be removed in order to adjust his mandatory separation date (MSD) of 1 Dec 14. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/DPTT recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. As a result, he would...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00922
INDEX CODE: 102.02 BC-2003-00922 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: Having carefully reviewed this application, we agree with the recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has been the victim of either an error or an injustice. Therefore, under the authority delegated in AFI 36-2603, the applicant's records will be corrected as set forth in the...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03160
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03160 INDEX CODE: 131.01, 107.00 COUNSEL: RAYMUNDO LUEVANOS HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 26 APR 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. The ratee did not provide any supporting evidence to prove the report contains any inaccurate information. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03248
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03248 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member in the Air Force Reserve who served as a Clinical Nurse, Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) 46N3. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03385
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The contested OPR included a statement from a former supervisor who manipulated a former employee to file a sexual harassment complaint in order to discredit him. The rating chain and commander determined that it was appropriate to mention this within his 10 May 2001 OPR. AFPC/DPPPO complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S...
She has not provided any documentation showing that a recommendation was submitted into official channels within two years of her meritorious service for that period. They state the RDP was not requested until 18 years after the closeout date of the decoration period, and was signed by retired personnel in her then chain of command. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...