RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-01583
INDEX CODE: 113.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
Applicant requests that her late husband’s records be corrected to show
that he had foreign service. Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A.
Applicant's military personnel records were destroyed by fire at the
National Personnel Record Center in 1973. Therefore, the facts surrounding
his separation from the Air Force cannot be verified. However, applicant
has provided a copy of her husband’s DD Form 214, (Report of Separation
from the Armed Forces of the United States).
After careful consideration of applicant’s request, we note that there are
no records available for review and applicant has not provided
documentation revealing the circumstances of her late husband’s service.
Therefore, we have no records upon which to determine whether or not the
service member had foreign service. However, based on the presumption of
regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs and without evidence to
the contrary, we must assume that the applicant’s discharge paperwork, to
include his DD Form 214, was proper and in compliance with appropriate
directives. Therefore, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider
this application.
The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision.
Applicant should also be informed that this decision is final and
application was filed.
Members of the Board Mr. Terry A. Yonkers, Mr. Joseph A. Roj, and Mr.
Steven A. Shaw considered this application on 11 October 2001 in accordance
with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-2603, and the governing
statute, 10, U.S.C. 1552.
TERRY A. YONKERS
Panel Chair
Exhibits:
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
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 discharge authority approved the recommendation for discharge on 27 Oct 72 and directed that the applicant be fbrnished an undesirable discharge certificate without probation and rehabilitation. The records indicate member’s military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken.
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied applicant’s request for an upgrade in her discharge on 1 February 1995. The records indicate the member’s military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 23 August 1989, she was honorably discharged and furnished an Honorable Discharge Certificate.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02073 INDEX NUMBER: 121.03 XXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Ten days of leave charged to her between graduation from a technical training course and her scheduled port call be restored. AFI 36-2102, attachment 7, states that “No member will be in an involuntary leave...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-03068 INDEX CODE: 131.00 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Applicant is the widow of a former service member who requests that the former service member’s records be corrected to reflect he was honorably discharged in the grade of sergeant rather than private. The applicant, the widow of a...
According to JPPSO, the applicant’s HHG shipment exceeded the maximum authorized weight allowance and in accordance with paragraph U5340, JFTR, she is liable for all transportation costs arising from transportation of HHG in excess of the authorized allowance. The evidence of record indicates that the applicant, after the death of her husband, a former service member, shipped HHG from Virginia to Colorado with a net weight of 29,200 pounds, including 3,057 pounds for the shipment of a POV. ...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). Applicant's DD Form 149 B.
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.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-01548 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be processed through the Disability Evaluation System (DES). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Chief, Medical Consultant, AFBCMR, reviewed the application and states that a Medical Evaluation...
DPPPWB assumes that his eligibility for promotion was reviewed during the 11 months preceding his separation, especially since he was awarded the Silver Star for his actions during the period Mar 44 to Sep 44. Since, at this late date, there is no way to know when the applicant would have met the established eligibility criteria for promotion, we believe that the applicant will be afforded proper and fitting relief by correcting his records to show he was promoted to the grade of technical...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1999-01798
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-01798 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO Applicant requests that his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded. Therefore, we have no records upon which to determine whether or not applicant’s separation was appropriate. The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision.