RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01092
INDEX CODE: 131.05
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His grade at the time of his discharge be changed from private first class
to sergeant.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was grounded for medical reasons and demoted from sergeant to private
first class. He is 83 and would like his highest held grade returned to
him.
His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant's records were destroyed by fire in 1973 at the National
Personnel Records Center, St. Louis MO; therefore, his service history
cannot be verified.
Data extracted from the documentation provided by the applicant reflects
that he entered active duty in the Army Air Corps on 29 Dec 42. The
documentation provided reflects his highest grade held was sergeant. On 20
Oct 45, he was separated for the convenience of the government in the grade
of private first class.
_________________________________________________________________
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. Because the applicant’s military service
records are unavailable and based upon the presumption of regularity in the
conduct of governmental affairs, we must assume that the circumstances
surrounding his reduction in grade were was proper and in compliance with
appropriate directives. If the applicant were to provide documentary
evidence, that would corroborate the circumstances surrounding his
reduction in grade, we would be willing to reconsider his request.
Therefore, based on the available evidence of record, and in the absence of
evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider
this application.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown
that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to
our understanding of the issue involved. Therefore, the request for a
hearing is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
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 BC-2004-
01092 in Executive Session on 16 Jun 04, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
Mr. Michael J. Novel, Member
Mr. Olga M. Crerar, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Nov 03, w/atchs.
MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01092
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01092 INDEX CODE: 137.04 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE (DECEASED) HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 12 OCTOBER 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her deceased former husband’s records be corrected to show he elected former spouse coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP). No recommendation is provided...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-01092
The applicant and member were married again on 14 Feb 75, however he did not request SBP coverage be reestablished on the applicant's behalf within the first year of their marriage, or during subsequent open enrollment periods. The SBP Election Certificate, provided by the applicant reflects he elected spouse and child SBP coverage on 11 Jan 80; however, the election was invalid because it was not completed during the authorized open enrollment period of one year. Members who were...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01526
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01526 INDEX NUMBER: 131.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be promoted from the grade of airman second class (A2C) to airman first class (A1C). There are no other promotion orders in his record to indicate he was ever promoted to A1C. We took notice of the applicant's...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03970
On 22 Dec 82, he received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 for financial irresponsibility and was reduced in grade from staff sergeant to sergeant. In their view, the Tower Amendment was not applicable to the applicant because he was reduced in grade prior to completion of 20 years of active service. In order for the applicant to have been eligible for retirement pay recalculation under the Tower Amendment, he would have needed 20 years of active service at the time he held the...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02950
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He served his time honorably without any nonjudicial punishment and needs his RE code changed to reenter the Air Force. DPSOA states, no issue of error or injustice warranting the requested relief is presented as the applicant held the grade of airman first class or below at the time of his discharge. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 Nov 07.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01460
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01460 INDEX NUMBER: 131.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: No MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 2 Nov 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The deceased member’s grandson (applicant) requests that his grandfather (member) be promoted to the grade of master sergeant (MSgt) (E-7). A thorough review of...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02159
___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He had problems during basic training and had to complete three extra months at basic. His grade at the time of discharge was airman basic, with an effective date and date of rank of 16 Jul 69. Therefore, based on the available evidence of record, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider this application.
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02212
Therefore, DPPPWB assumes the discharge certificate and Enlisted Record and Report of Separation reflect the correct rank. After a thorough review of the available evidence and the applicant’s complete submission, we find no evidence which would persuade us that the former member's service records should be corrected to show he was promoted to any grade higher than that reflected in his military records. We agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02269
As of this date, this office has received no response (Exhibit D & E). The discharge appears to be in compliance with the governing regulation and we find no evidence to indicate that his separation from the Air Force was inappropriate. We find no evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the documentation that has been submitted in support of the applicant’s appeal, we do not believe he has suffered from an injustice.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01343
AFBCMR BC-2004-01343 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: XXXXXXX, XXXXXXX Having carefully reviewed this application, we agree with the recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has been the victim of either an error or an injustice. Members of the Board, Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Mr. Terry L. Scott, and Mr. Albert C. Ellett, considered this...