SVFR

JAG is spring loaded to take it to court in our current political climate. Don't know the facts of this case but I saw one go to court where the only evidence was the accusers testimony and the accusers psychologist testimony of what the accuser already said.

In his boss's defense, the 11S was in a staff job and his boss was not 11S. I don't have any defense for big blue. There should have been some type of review so random luck wasn't the difference between continuation and non. I think I know the 11H you are referring too. I wouldn't imagine he had any discriminators but I think he self eliminated from a formal training course to deal with a personal family matter. That would have generated a training report that might have been viewed negatively. Of course he could have also had a board member that overlooked he was an 11H. Again, big blue fail.

I saw the guidance the boards were suppose to use. However I do know an 11S who was going to be non-continued but was saved by a board member pointing out to his commander (also a board member) that he could be continued based on being 11S.

I don't understand why you would decline TERA. As far as 11U, I don't remember but the counselor owes me a follow up so I will try to get the complete list.

I had a non-select counseling appointment this week. I asked some of those questions. The counselor brought a list of the non-continued officers. It was a about 5 pages long, double spaced with one name per line. Not sure why the AF doesn't publish the number but the list is internally published. The counselor said only a handful of people non-continued did not qualify for TERA. I didn't remember the complete list, just got a glance of it, but the following should have been offered continuation last year and this up coming year based on SECAF guidance: 11S, 11F, and 11H. That is based on being "fully qualified". ie no negative discriminators. Note that myPers doesn't give those details. If continuation is offered it is only to 20 years. Finally, if selected for continuation you can decline and still receive TERA if qualified.

I tried some different stuff (belt, drop, shoulder) and I ended up with the horizontal Galco Miami classic shoulder holster. You can get it configured for horizontal or vertical carry. I much preferred the horizontal carry but the E-9s will be all over you. I had to defend myself on numerous occasions by saying there was an exception for aircrew (the whole unique/different/special argument that most Chiefs prefer to walk away from but still ends up raising their blood pressure). Not sure that there is but it sounded good. Doesn't seem you have that option.

Signed, faxed, tracking number message received, and final review message received - all in less than 15 mins. Message claims DFAS will not be forwarded agreement for process until on or after ADSC effective date on agreement.

They take their taxes before you see the money so come April you shouldn't have any surprises. However it does appear to be enough money to push someone from the 25 to 28% or 28 to 33% bracket depending on marriage status and use of tax deferred shelters.

Yesterday the link said I was not eligiable. Today I can't access the site. I guess that is an improvement.

Bob's voice mail confirms post #406.

Do you have a DSN for Bob? Seems like he could have told you some details without telling you any details like if there were major change$.

Congressional mandates never stopped them in the past.

Not yet.

No status change based on what the ACP Manager just told me. I did get some more details about the approval process. The SECAF is having it reviewed by his general counsel. So the lawyers will make more than us off this based on thier hourly rate.

Can someome reply every night so when I check this thread there is a glimer of hope when it gets bumped to the top?