-
-
IN THE MATTER OF:
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECOWS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
DOCKET NO: 98-00298
COUNSEL: NONE
JUN 1 9 19%
HEARING DESIRED: NO
Applicant requests that the narrative reason for separation, t y p e
of serxration and the separation code be changed. Applicant’s
submiGsion is at Exhibit A.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant’s request
and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the
application be denied (Exhibit C). The Air Force states based on
information contained in applicant‘s application, the narrative
reason for separation has been corrected to read “Officer
Training Program.” The advisory opinion was forwarded to the
applicant f o r review and response (Exhibit D) . As of this date,
no response has been received by this o f f i c e .
After careful consideration of applicant’s request and the
available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of
error or injustice to warrant corrective action. The facts and
opinions stated in the advisory opinion appear to be based on the
evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant.
Absent persuasive evidence applicant w a s denied rights to which
entitled, appropriate regulations were not followed, or
appropriate standards were not applied, we find no basis to
disturb the existing record.
Accordingly, applicant’s request is denied.
The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision.
Applicant should also be informed that this decision is final and
will only be reconsidered upon the presentation of new relevant
evidence which was not reasonably available at the time the
application was filed.
Members of the Board, Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Mr. Michael P.
Higgins, and Mr. Thomas S . Mawkiewicz considered this application
on 17 June 1998, in accordance with the provisions of Air Force
Instruction 36-2603, and the governing statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552.
DAVID c
d
AN GASBECK
r
Exhibits:
A. Applicantis DD Form 149
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinion
D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
DEPARTMENT O F THE A I R FORCE
HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE PERSONNEL CENTER
RANDOLPH AIR FORCE BASE TEXAS
FEB 2 7 1998
I
MEMORANDUM FOR DPPRR
AFBCMR
INTURN
FROM:
HQ AFPCDPPRS
550 C Street West Ste 11
Randolph AFB TX 78150-4713
The applicant, while serving in the grade of senior airman, was discharged from the Air Force
21 Jul97 under the provisions of MI 36-3208 (Officer Training Program) with an honorable
discharge. He served 03 years 09 months and 15 days total active service.
Requested Action. The applicant is requesting correction to items 23,26 and 28 of his DD
Form 214 issued for his active period of service ending 21 Jul97,
Facts. Applicant’s master personnel record does not contain the AF Form 3 1 (Application for
Early Separation) which he would have had to submit in order to be discharged prior to his
expiration term of service, However, based on information contained in applicant’s application,
he voluntarily submitted a request for a early separation under provisions of AFI 36-3208,
paragraph 2,15 (Entering an AFROTC Program) which was approved by the discharge authority
and applicant was discharged on 21 Jul97. Applicant was given the correct type of separation,
item 23 as discharge and the correct separation code of KGX, item 23, however, the narrative
reason for separation, item 28, should be administratively corrected to read “Officer Training
Program” by AFPC/DPPRR.
Recommendation, Approval in part. Recommend DPPRR issue a DD Form 2 15 to
administratively correct item 28 of the DD Form 214, however, recommend AFBCMR deny
applicant’s request for changes to items 23 and 26 of the DD Form 214 which are correct.
JOHN C. WOOTEN, GS-9
Military Personnel Mgrnt Spec
Separations Branch
Dir of Personnel Program Management
The applicant voluntarily requested early separation from the Air Force by submitting an AF Form 3 1 which indicated her reason for requesting early separation was miscellaneous reason. However, with the applicant’s desire to separate 01 Jan 98 (as indicated in her application), she still would not have been eligible for a separation “to attend school” because her normal expiration term of service (ETS) was 980328, more than 90 days allowed by Air Force Instructions. The Air Force approved...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). - After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action. Applicant did not identi@ any specific errors in the discharg&progessing nor provide facts which warrant a change in the discharge he received.
On 28 Apr 98, the applicant provided additional evidence and requested that the Board reconsider her application (Exhibit F) . The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The discharge complies with directives in effect at the time of her discharge.
The Board concluded that, because the applicant was undergoing disability processing for his unfitting medical condition at the same time he was being processed for an administrative discharge for a personality disorder that was not a physical disability, he should have been processed as a "dual action" case in accordance with AFI 36-3212. I n applicant's case, while his disability case was being processed, Kessler AFB Discharge Authority separated applicant under the administrative...
Exhibit A. code be Applicant's RE code of 2B is defined as "Separated with Applicant's submission is at The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). Applicant's response to the advisory opinion is at Exhibit E. After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence...
I' A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Separations Branch, Directorate of Personnel Program Management, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed the application and states that they concur with the AFBCMR Medical Consultant's recommendation that applicant's narrative reason for separation should be changed to "Secretarial Authority" with a SPD of 'lJFF1' and her reentry code be changed to a3K.11 Applicant's characterization of service should remain the same since she did...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-02531 INDEX CODE: 100, 100.03 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The narrative reason for her separation on her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty) be changed from Miscellaneous/General Reasons to financial hardship and that her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action. The records indicate member’s military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01418 INDEX CODE 110.02 100.06 xxxxxxxxxxx COUNSEL: No xxxxxxxxxxx HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The narrative reason on her DD Form 214 be changed from “Personality Disorder” to one that more accurately reflects her diagnosis and her military record reflect she is fit for military service. Since the...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01418 INDEX CODE 110.02 100.06 xxxxxxxxxxx COUNSEL: No xxxxxxxxxxx HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The narrative reason on her DD Form 214 be changed from “Personality Disorder” to one that more accurately reflects her diagnosis and her military record reflect she is fit for military service. Since the...