RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-00367
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be promoted to the Reserve grade of airman first class (E-4) effective
February 1963.
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 Chief, Personnel and Training, ANG/DP, reviewed the application and
states that the Board, under its charter, can review the application and
determined whether or not an injustice has occurred, taking into account
his active duty/Air National Guard (ANG) military service, his
accomplishments since his separation, and noting that no monetary benefits
are involved. Therefore, they recommend the Board give full consideration
to granting the requested relief.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or
regulations.
2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest
of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
3. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of probable error or injustice. In this respect, we note that
ANG/DP is unable to determine, with any certainty, the applicant’s
promotion eligibility at the time prior to his release from the ANG and
subsequent assignment to the inactive Reserve. However, the evidence of
record indicates that he served honorably during his tenure in the
ANG/Reserve and attained a passing score in the Specialty Knowledge Test
(SKT) for the five level of Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) 67153,
Disbursement Accounting Specialist. In view of this, and given his
accomplishments since his separation, we believe any doubt regarding this
issue should be resolved in the applicant’s behalf. Therefore, we
recommend his records be corrected to the extent indicated below.
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating
to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 1 February 1963, he was promoted
to the Reserve grade of airman first class (E-4).
The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive
Session on 13 June 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Vaughn E. Schlunz, Panel Chair
Mr. Philip Sheuerman, Member
Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The following
documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Jun 00, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, ANG/DP, dated 8 Jun 01.
VAUGHN E. SCHLUNZ
Panel Chair
AFBCMR 01-00367
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 on 1 February 1963, he was
promoted to the Reserve grade of airman first class (E-4).
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. ANG/DPFP indicates that neither the military personnel flight (MPF) nor the state headquarters was able to provide documentation substantiating the applicant's claim for the AFAM. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant withdrew his requests for the AFGCM and the AFAM, and acknowledges the administrative...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-00438
In view of the failure to notify the applicant of his eligibility to be considered for promotion by the boards in question and in view of applicant’s desire to write a letter to the Board president, we recommend that his records, provided he submits a letter to the Board president, be considered for promotion to the Reserve grade of major by a SRB for the FY97 board and by a SSB for the FY98 board. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS...
In view of the failure to notify the applicant of his eligibility to be considered for promotion by the boards in question and in view of applicant’s desire to write a letter to the Board president, we recommend that his records, provided he submits a letter to the Board president, be considered for promotion to the Reserve grade of major by a SRB for the FY97 board and by a SSB for the FY98 board. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS...
He was to be promoted to E-7 under the 12/20 rule. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/DPB reviewed applicant’s request and recommends denial. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04046
Members of the Board, Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Ms. Mary J. Johnson, and Mr. Vaughn Schlunz, considered this application on 6 May 2003. ROSCOE HINTON JR Panel Chair Attachment: Ltr, ANG/DPPI, dtd 13 Mar 03, w/atch BC-2002-04046 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, and having assured compliance with the provisions of the above regulation, the decision of the Air Force Board for Correction of...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | bc-2004-02142
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was initially enlisted on 8 May 2003 in the higher grade of A1C as she enlisted in a critical Air Force Specialty (AFS). She was enlisted in the next lower grade and later found another airman who had enlisted under the same circumstances but at the higher grade. ______________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Officer Evaluation Board Section, HQ AFPC/DPPPEB, reviewed this application and states in order for the applicant to receive a Definitely Promote (DP) recommendation on his PRF that was previously corrected, he would again need the senior rater and the Management Level Review (MLR) President's support. A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01485
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-1485 INDEX CODE: 110.02, 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His discharge be upgraded to honorable, his prior grade and rank be reinstated, and his reenlistment eligibility be changed to “Eligible.” _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00326
His character of service was Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) and his reenlistment eligibility was recorded as “Ineligible.” _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ANG/DPPI recommends denial. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice warranting a change in his discharge and reenlisment eligibility. Vaughn E. Schlunz Panel Chair DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON...
Applicant explains that he should have received additional constructive service credit for education and experience upon his transfer to the Air National Guard. The Chief states that applicant’s civilian experience from 1 Oct 92 to 16 Jun 94 is not creditable because this was part-time employment; his experience from 16 Jun 94 through his date of appointment in the Air National Guard was duplicated credit since he was already commissioned in the Army National Guard and according to Air...