RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 01-01339
INDEX CODE: 100.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
Applicant requests that the total number of days of training in the Space
and Missile career field be reduced, which would reduce his Active Duty
Service Commitment (ADSC) and allow him to apply for Undergraduate Flying
Training (UFT). 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 (Exhibit D). As of this date, no response has been
received by this office.
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
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. We note that after fulfilling his ADSC, the applicant may
seek an “exception to policy” age waiver in accordance with established
procedures.
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 Mrs. Barbara A. Westgate, Mr. Steven A. Shaw, and Mr.
Roger E. Willmeth considered this application on 9 August 2001, in
accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-2603, and the
governing statute, 10, U.S.C. 1552.
BARBARA A. WESTGATE
Chair
Exhibits:
A. Applicant's DD Form 149, w/atchs
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinion
D. AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
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). 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.
They further state that the completed agreement clearly states “ADSC under this agreement will be the day following completion of existing ADSC for any medical education and training.” They noted that applicant properly executed the agreement which stated the provisions of the associated active duty obligation and projected staffing in the applicant’s specialty are based on his retainability to 16 May 2003. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-00252 INDEX NUMBER: 100.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His three-year Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) incurred as a result of his completion of T-37 Pilot Instructor Training be reduced by 16 months. Even if the applicant’s request to reduce his PIT ADSC by 16 months is approved his...
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 10 September 1997, the applicant signed an AF Form 63, OFFICER/AIRMAN ACTIVE DUTY SERVICE COMMITMENT (ADSC) COUNSELING STATEMENT, indicating that he acknowledged and agreed to, among other things, incur a 36-month ADSC for W-MCE-l3BD1 under Table 1.5, Rule 5, AFI 36-2107 (See Applicant’s Attachment 1). However, the applicant never states he was confused about the length of his ADSC prior to start of...
___________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant was counseled on and voluntarily accepted a two-year ADSC for TA via the AF Form 63, Officer ADSC Counseling Statement, on 8 December 1998 and 9 March 1999. Each form clearly advises the applicant against accepting any ADSC information other than that contained in the form (i.e., promises implied or otherwise, concerning the possibility or probability of retirement or separation prior to...
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). 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 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). 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 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). Applicant’s response 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 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). 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.