Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200965
Original file (0200965.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-00965
            INDEX CODE:  128.05

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Selected Reenlistment Bonus  (SRB)  payment  be  adjusted  to  six
years.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

There was gross negligence in her counseling process.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a  personal  statement,  a
copy of her  enlistment  papers  and  a  copy  of  the  Implementation
Instructions for Full Enlistment Program message.

Applicant's complete submission is attached 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:

AFPC/DPPAE reviewed the application  and  recommends  the  request  be
disapproved.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________



APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 14 June 2002, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was  forwarded  to
applicant for review and response within 30 days.  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.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the  existence  of  error  or  injustice.   We  took  notice  of   the
applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case;
however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force
and adopt their rationale as the basis for  the  conclusion  that  the
applicant  has  not  been  the  victim  of  an  error  or   injustice.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to  the  contrary,  we  find  no
compelling basis to recommend  granting  the  relief  sought  in  this
application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of material error  or  injustice;  that  the
application was denied without a personal  appearance;  and  that  the
application will only be reconsidered upon  the  submission  of  newly
discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 23 July 2002, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                 Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member
                 Mr. Albert J. Starnes, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:







      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Mar 02, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 10 Jun 02.
      Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 14 Jun 02.




                             PATRICIA D. VESTAL
                             Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200514

    Original file (0200514.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    At the time the applicant requested information about reenlisting, current policy stated that a member could only reenlist 90 days prior to their expiration of term of service (ETS). We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200876

    Original file (0200876.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00876 INDEX CODE: 128.05 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He receive the difference between the 2.5 multiple Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) for the 1A4X1 AFSC and a 3.0 SRB for the 1A4X1D. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200426

    Original file (0200426.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The RE code which was issued at the time of applicant’s separation accurately reflects the circumstances of her separation and we do not find this code to be in error or unjust. In view of the foregoing, we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected by deleting the words “and conduct” from her narrative reason for separation. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200284

    Original file (0200284.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He received an uncharacterized entry level separation on 21 Aug 01 under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (fraudulent entry into military service). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits C and D. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS stated that, on 15 Aug 01, the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201154

    Original file (0201154.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The doctor told him the only way to get out of the Air Force was to say that he was a homosexual and he would be out in two days. On 25 July 1995, the commander notified the applicant that he was being discharged from the Air Force with an entry-level separation. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE states that the reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C, Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00959

    Original file (BC-2003-00959.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The person told him that he would be able to reenlist as his discharge was a General discharge. On 26 June 2002, applicant was notified that he was being discharged under the auspices of Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-3208, for unsatisfactory duty performance and minor disciplinary infractions. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we are not persuaded that his uncorroborated assertions of an increase in maturity, in and of itself, sufficiently...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04089

    Original file (BC-2002-04089.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-04089 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 4D (senior airman or sergeant with at least nine years total active military service but fewer than sixteen years) be changed to enable her to reenter the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201548

    Original file (0201548.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining 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 at Exhibits C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPP recommends the application be denied. DPPP stated that the fact the applicant met a faculty board is not the failure of an intended personnel action. The HQ AFPC/DPPP evaluation is at...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200861

    Original file (0200861.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFBCMR Medical Consultant states that the applicant’s service medical record, which appears to be complete since it includes a report of his induction physical, contains no references to any hospitalization in Florida. There is no evidence in the service medical record to support the applicant’s request. Pre-existing medical conditions incurred prior to a member’s entrance on active duty are not ratable...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0103538

    Original file (0103538.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ___________________________________________________________________ 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 at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPTR reviewed this application and recommended denial. In Jul 01, former spouse coverage was established...