ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-01442
XXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None
XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, he requests that the Board
allow him to reenlist in the Air Force.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant, while serving in the grade of airman first class, was
separated from the Air Force on 15 May 01 for fraudulent entry into
military service and received an uncharacterized entry-level separation.
The applicant had previously signed DD Form 1966/2, Record of Military
Processing-Armed Forces of the United States, on 20 Feb 01, stating that he
had never been in any regular or reserve branch of the Armed Forces, or in
the Army or Air National Guard. In fact, the applicant has been issued
three DD Forms 214, Certificates of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.
He served from Jan–May 87 in the Army/Army National Guard and was honorably
relieved from active duty training. He served from Oct 88 to Jan 89 in the
regular Army and was honorably discharged with a personality disorder. He
also served from May-Jul 94 in the regular Army and received an
uncharacterized discharge for failure to meet procurement medical
standards. Had the Air Force known of the applicant’s history, he would
have been ineligible to enlist.
On 23 Aug 01, the Board considered and denied an application from the
applicant requesting that the narrative reason for separation on his DD
Form 214 be changed from “fraudulent” to “erroneous” enlistment and that
his separation code be changed accordingly (Exhibit F).
On 5 Sep 02, the applicant submitted a copy of a DD Form 293, dated 17 May
01, with the same request as above (Exhibit G). The Board denied the
request on 25 Sep 02 on the basis that it did not meet the criteria for
reconsideration by the Board (Exhibit H).
The applicant submitted a new DD Form 149 on 26 Oct 02 requesting that he
be allowed to reenlist in the Air Force (Exhibit I). The Board denied the
applicant’s request on 14 Nov 02 on the grounds that it was essentially a
request for reconsideration of the Board’s earlier decision and that the
applicant did not submit any new relevant evidence (Exhibit J).
On 3 Dec 02, the Board received an undated letter from the applicant again
requesting that he be allowed to reenlist in the Air Force. The applicant
has included copies of documents highlighting his accomplishments in the
civilian sector (Exhibit K).
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
After again reviewing this application and the evidence provided in support
of the appeal, a majority of the Board remains unpersuaded that the
applicant has been the victim of an error or injustice warranting relief.
The majority of the Board notes that the applicant still has not provided
any corroborating evidence to support his contention that he was advised
not to reveal his prior service during his enlistment in the Air Force.
The majority of the Board also notes that the applicant has had three
previous periods of service with him being separated for cause in at least
two instances. While the applicant’s post-service accomplishments appear
impressive, the majority of the Board does not consider them sufficiently
compelling to grant the relief requested.
_________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD:
A majority of the Board finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice
and recommends the application be denied.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive
Session on 19 December 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Panel Chair
Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Member
Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Member
By a majority vote, the Board voted to deny applicant’s request. Ms.
Crerar voted to grant the applicant’s requests but did not desire to submit
a minority report. The following additional documentary evidence was
considered:
Exhibit F. Record of Proceedings, dated 29 August 2001,
with Exhibits.
Exhibit G. DD Form 293, dated 17 May 01.
Exhibit H. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 25 Sep 02.
Exhibit I. DD Form 149, dated 26 Oct 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit J. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 14 Nov 02.
Exhibit K. Applicant’s Letter, undated, w/atchs.
JOSEPH A. ROJ
Panel Chair
___________________________________________________________________ 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. ___________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: A majority of the Board finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be denied. Exhibit B.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01793A
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01793 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, he provides four letters of character reference in support of the following original requests: a. A majority of the Board finds that the commander acted completely...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-1995-01626A
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-1995-01626 INDEX CODE 111.01 111.05 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: In his request for reconsideration, the applicant asks that he be informed by letter if his Officer Effectiveness Report (OER) for the period 21 Oct 72 through 31 Aug 73 is...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02362
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Through his congressman, the applicant provided a statement as to the circumstances surrounding his recruitment in the Air Force, his military service and subsequent discharge. In view of the foregoing, we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected by deleting the words “and conduct” from his narrative reason...
He further states he received a rating of “three” on his last EPR because he was not within the weight standards. The EPR closing Jun 00 indicates he continued to struggle to meet Air Force weight standards, which negatively affected his overall promotion potential and showed his failure to meet the standards over a prolonged period of time. Further, they state that the applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence or evaluator support to warrant upgrading the report.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2002-01793C
THIRD ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01793 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The applicant requests reconsideration of the following previously denied requests: a. After reviewing the applicant’s complete evidence of record to include the new evidence, the Board again denied the...
DPPPO would not object to correcting the duty location in the Personnel Data System (PDS) to reflect Luke AFB. A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and indicated, in part, that although the central promotion board had knowledge of his JSCM, they had a board discrepancy report in place of his JSCM citation. ...
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPO evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 17 May 02 for review and response. We note that the MSM (2OLC) was not required to be filed in the applicant’s records when he was considered for promotion by the CY01B Lieutenant Colonel Board. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02964
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-02964 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His date of rank (DOR) to SSgt (E-5) be corrected from 6 Feb 01 to 1 Jan 96, his DOR when he served in the U.S. Army. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, the Board majority believes that it is not unreasonable to believe that the...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00822 INDEX CODE: 112.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be released from his three-month extension of service, and his original date of separation of 8 Sep 02 be reinstated. Accordingly, we recommend that the applicant’s records be corrected to reflect that he extended his enlistment for...