RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05230	
			COUNSEL:  NONE
 			HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, Block 28, Narrative Reason for Separation, be amended to 
reflect “Forced Reduction at the Convenience of the Government.”   

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She intended to complete her 4 year commitment but was released 
from military service due to the convenience of the government.  
Until this is corrected she is not eligible for any benefits.  

Since her character of service was honorable she was unaware her 
narrative reason was an issue until she went to enroll in 
college.  

In support of her request, the applicant provides a copy of her 
DD Form 214.  

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at 
Exhibit A.  

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 14 Oct 08, the applicant entered active duty.

According to her AF Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report (AB 
thru TSgt), for the period ending 13 Jun 10, she received a 
referral report with an overall rating of “2.”  The specific 
reasons for the referral report were she received three Letters 
of Reprimand (LOR) and an Unfavorable Information File (UIF) for 
failure to report to duty and obey orders.  She was also not 
recommended for promotion and failed to meet fitness standards.  

On 31 Aug 10, she was honorably discharged with a narrative 
reason for separation of “Completion of Required Active Service” 
and Reentry (RE) code 3A which denotes “1st term airman 
separating before 36 months.”


She served 1 year, 10 months and 17 days on active duty.  

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial.  The applicant did not provide any 
evidence of an error or injustice to warrant the requested 
change to her narrative reason for separation.  Due to the 
limited amount of records, DPSOR was unable to review her actual 
discharge processing documentation for accuracy.  Based on 
documents that are on file in her records, the discharge to 
include the Separation Program Designator (SPD) code, narrative 
reason for separation and character of service was consistent 
with the procedural and substantive requirements of the Air 
Force instruction and Military Personnel Flight Memorandum 
(MPFM) 10-43 and was within the discretion of the discharge 
authority.  The applicant was separated under the FY10 Date of 
Separation (DOS) Rollback Program with a SPD of JBK.  IAW MPFM 
10-43, airmen with RE codes 2X (Denied Reenlistment), 3D 
(Declined Permanent Change of Station Retainability), 3E 
(Declined Training, 4H (Serving Suspended Punishment Pursuant to 
Article 15) and 4I (Serving on Control Roster) were subject to 
discharge under the rollback program.  Although the applicant’s 
records are limited, they do reveal she had a referral report 
that mentions non-recommendation for promotion, three LORs, a 
UIF, and the phrase “administered multiple UCMJ articles” at the 
time the DOS Rollback was initiated, therefore, she became a 
candidate for early separation.  

The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 13 Jan 14, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded 
to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit 
D).  As of this date, this office has not received a response. 

_________________________________________________________________

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 timely file.     

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  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 its 
rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has 
not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, 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 BC-2013-05230 in Executive Session on 19 Aug 14 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

 , Panel Chair
 , Member
 , Member
      
The following pertinent documentary was considered:

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Nov 13, w/atch.      
Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Military Personnel Records.
Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 17 Dec 13.
Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 13 Jan 14. 


				Panel Chair