SIXTH ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-1986-02531
INDEX CODE: 110.03
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 28 Dec 06
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. His records be corrected to reflect that he did not separate from
active duty on 25 Jun 92, but was continued on active duty in the grade of
captain, and was promoted to the grade of major along with his
contemporaries, was tendered a Regular Air Force appointment, and assigned
to Charleston AFB, SC.
2. In the alternative, he requests his records be corrected to reflect
that he remained in the Air Force in the grade of captain, was tendered a
Regular Air Force appointment, was assigned to Charleston AFB, SC, and was
retired in the grade of captain on 1 Jan 2002
3. He be paid all back pay and allowances.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 13 Sep 85, he was honorably released from active duty as result of two
nonselections for promotion to the grade of captain. He enlisted in the
Regular Air Force on 10 Dec 85. On 25 Jun 92, he was found physically
unfit for continued military service and was discharged with severance pay.
He was credited with 14 years, 4 months, and 25 days of active service.
On 10 Jan 02, the Board granted his request that four Officer Effectiveness
Reports be removed from his records and directed that he be promoted to the
grade of captain. The Board denied that portion of his request in which he
requested continuation on active duty beyond 25 Jun 92. For an accounting
of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s request and the
rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Fourth Addendum to
the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit F.
On 27 Jul 04, applicant submitted a request for reconsideration of his
application. On 2 Sep 04, the Board reconsidered his request for
reconsideration and again denied his request. See the Fifth Addendum to
the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit H.
On 14 Jun 05, his Congressman provided a personal statement to the Board
along with additional statements supporting his request. The Congressman's
complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit I.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. After again reviewing this application and the additional evidence
provided in support of the applicant's appeal, it is the Board's opinion
that favorable consideration of the requested action is not warranted. The
contentions made in support of his appeal are duly noted; however, we are
not persuaded by those assertions that errors or improprieties existed in
his disability processing, he was denied rights to which he was entitled,
or that he did not receive full and fair consideration under disability
evaluation guidelines. We do not find the assertions provided sufficiently
persuasive to override the previous determinations that his separation by
reason of physical disability was appropriate at the time it was initiated
and that further change to his military record is not warranted. It is our
opinion that since he was found unqualified for worldwide duty and unfit
for further military service by competent medical authority, the actions
initiated to effect his separation from active duty were appropriate.
Therefore, we find no compelling basis upon which to favorably consider the
requested relief.
2. 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 issues 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 this application in Executive
Session on 26 Jul 05, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Charles E. Bennett, Panel Chair
Mr. Vance E. Lineberger, Member
Mr. Frederick R. Beaman, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit H. Fifth Addendum to Record of Proceedings,
dated 2 Sep 04, w/with Exhibits.
Exhibit I. Congressional Letter, dated 14 Jun 05, w/atchs
CHARLES E. BENNETT
Panel Chair
endum to Record of Board Proceedings
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-1986-02531E
On 25 Jun 92, he was found physically unfit for continued military service and was discharged with severance pay. The Board denied that portion of his request in which he requested continuation on active duty beyond 25 Jun 92. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a...
AF | DRB | CY2007 | FD2007-00012
The records indicated the applicant received two Article 15s and a Vacation for misconduct. Reduction to AB, restriction to the limits of Charleston AFB, SC, for 30 days, and 30 days extra duty. (No appeal) (No mitigation) (2) 01 May 06, Vacation, Charleston AFB, SC - Article 92.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01122
The Board took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, the majority of the Board agrees with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopts the OPR’s rationale as the basis for its conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. _________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: A majority of the panel finds...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01496
After his selection for promotion to senior master sergeant it was determined that he should have been considered with a CAFSC of 8F000, First Sergeant and that his selection for promotion was erroneous. In view of the conflicting AFIs governing the effective date for changing the CAFSC upon being selected for retraining and the fact that it is conceivable the applicant may have been at a disadvantage in competing for supplemental promotion because his record was scored against benchmark...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02899
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02899 INDEX CODE: 131.00, 107.00 COUNSEL: Mr. Barry P. Steinberg HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Officer Selection Records (OSR) prepared for the 21 Sep 04 Special Board be corrected to include the Aerial Achievement Medal (AAM) first oak leaf cluster (1OLC) awarded for the period 16 May 92...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02903
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02903 INDEX CODE: 131.00, 107.00 COUNSEL: Mr. Barry P. Steinberg HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Officer Selection Records (OSR) prepared for the 21 Sep 04 Special Board be corrected to include the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) second oak leaf cluster (2OLC) awarded for the period 26 Nov 89...
AF | DRB | CY2005 | FD2005-00005
a #$ K'AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE CASE NUMBER FD-2005-00005 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable. For this misconduct, you received a Letter of Counseling, dated 13 Sep 02 (Attachment D); and e. On or about 24 Sep 02, you were derelict in the performance of your duties by willfully giving a false official statement to your First Sergeant. For this misconduct, you received a Letter of Reprimand, dated 1 Oct 02 (Attachment E).
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02902
He was considered and not selected for retention in the Air Force by the FY93 RIF board, which convened on 20 Jul 92. He has not provided any supporting documentation to show the intent of the evaluators to have the report on file prior to the convening of the RIF board. The DPPPO evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel states the OPR was delayed through no fault of the applicant's.
AF | DRB | CY2007 | FD2006-00449
The DRB noted that when the applicant applied for these benefits, he signed a statement (DD Form 2366, on August 1 1, 1997) that he understood he must receive an Honorable discharge to receive future educational entitlements. MFR, 23 OCT 98 - Failed to report to two scheduled appointments. For this conduct you received an Article 15 dated 21 - - - - - - Transitional Assistance Briefings) as evidenced by a Memo for Record m. On 22 October 1998, you failed to report to two scheduled...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02202
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02202 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: A Letter of Reprimand (LOR), with an Unfavorable Information File (UIF), dated 27 March 2001, be removed from his records. His situation was reviewed by the Air Force Office of Special Investigation commander (AFOSI/CC) on 15 June 2001 and the...