RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03466
INDEX CODE: 100.01
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The inaccurate spelling of his name in his record be corrected from
“B---sz” to “B---rz.”
___________________________________________________________________
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:
Applicant enlisted in the Air Corps on 17 Oct 42 to serve the
duration of the war, plus six months. He was honorably discharged
on 25 Jan 46. His DD Form 214, Report of Separation from the Armed
Forces of the United States, reflects that he completed 3 years,
3 months, and 9 days of total active service.
The applicant’s enlistment and separation documents reflect his
last name as “B---.” A DSS Form 190, Notice to Recruiting
Services, reflects his last name as “B---.” In addition, the
applicant’s clinical records contain two documents that reflect his
last name as “B---,” one of which was corrected to show “B---.”
___________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPRS reviewed this application and recommended denial.
After reviewing the applicant’s complete military records, it was
discovered that the name B--- was used throughout his military
career. Also, the applicant signed numerous documents with the
proposed “incorrect” spelling of his name.
Air Force Instruction 36-2608 states that to correct a name that
has been erroneously recorded, the applicant must provide a
statement of circumstances and the original or certified copy of a
public record, birth or baptismal certificate, etc. Correspondence
was sent to the applicant requesting an official or notarized copy
of his birth certificate. However, he did not respond. His
military record currently reflects the legal name under which he
served and was discharged.
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant
on 28 Feb 03 for review and comment 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 not timely filed; however, it is in the
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. After a thorough
review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we are
not persuaded that his uncorroborated assertions, in and by
themselves, are sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale
provided by the Air Force. We note that the applicant was advised
that in order to correct a name that has been erroneously recorded,
the member must provide a statement of circumstances and the
original or certified copy of a public record, birth or baptismal
certificate, etc.; however, he did not respond. Should the
applicant provide the requested documentation, we would be willing
to reconsider his petition. Absent such evidence, we agree with
the recommendation of the Air Force and adopt the rationale
expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has
failed to sustain his burden that he has suffered either an error
or an injustice. Therefore, based on the available evidence of
record, we find no 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 AFBCMR Docket Number
02-03466 in Executive Session on 7 May 2003, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Joseph G. Diamond, Panel Chair
Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Member
Ms. Dorothy P. Loeb, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Oct 02.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSAMP, dated 19 Feb 03, w/atch.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Feb 03.
JOSEPH G. DIAMOND
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03849
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. ___________________________________________________________________ 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. Applicant's Master...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02460
They indicate that according to their records, the applicant has not declined his FSGLI coverage, nor is there any evidence submitted which indicates any injustice occurred. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit B. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00830
The coverage, by law, was automatic for all members of the Armed Forces who had a spouse and/or children, unless the member declined coverage. His MPF could not find a copy of his letter declining coverage. HQ ARPC extensively advertised the change to the program, including an article in the Air Reserve Personnel Update, and the notifications sent to the applicant’s address contained information regarding the FSGLI changes.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03779
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 Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ ARPC/DPS recommends the application be denied. The coverage, by law, was automatic for all members of the Armed Forces who had a spouse and/or children, unless the member decline coverage. As of this...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2001-03442
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 17 April 2002, the applicant provided additional information, with attachments, to support her appeal. Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPW stated that the applicant was erroneously charged for SGLI for the period of 20 Feb 98 to 31 Mar 01. In their opinion,...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03841
He received records of counseling on six occasions (11 Aug 82, 5 and 6 Jan 83, 4 May 83, and 10 and 11 May 83) for failure to meet AFR 39-6 Responsibilities. After reviewing the evidence of record, the applicant’s overall quality of service and the events which precipitated his separation from the Air Force, we find no evidence to indicate that either the assigned separation code or the RE code are in error or unjust. ___________________________________________________________________ THE...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03353
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. Applicant’s records reflect award of the Air Force Longevity Service Medal, Air Force Training Ribbon, Air Force Overseas Ribbon, Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon, Honor Graduate Ribbon, and Air Force Good Conduct Medal. ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommended disapproval of the applicant’s request for award of the NCO PME Graduate Ribbon.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03848
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. ___________________________________________________________________ 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. Applicant's Master...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03610
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was attending basic military training at the time declination of FSGLI needed to be accomplished and had no way of knowing about the new insurance coverage or the accruing debt. Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. DPS states that the applicant completed the Family Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (FSGLI) election statement declining coverage on 4 Sep 02, which became effective 1 Oct 02.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02975
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPW recommends the application be denied due to lack of sufficient evidence to support the applicant’s claim. Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 Sep 02. Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPW, dated 3 Dec 02, w/atch Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Dec 02.