I
8
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
WASHINGTON, D. C.
Office of the Assistant Secretary
AFBCMR 98-01 155
MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF
Under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code, Air Force Instruction
36-2603, and having assured compliance with the provisions of the above regulation, the
decision of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records is announced, and it is
directed that:
records of the Department of the Air Force relating to
corrected to show that she was honorably discharged on &
YMOND H. WELLER
chief Examiner
Air Force Board for Correction
of Military Records
b
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
WASHINGTON, D. C.
i
O@T 2 11998
Office of the Assistant Secretary
AFBCMR 98-01 155
MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR
SUBJECT:
Having carefully reviewed this application, we agree with the recommendation of the Air
Force 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. Therefore, under the authority delegated in AFI 36-
2603, the applicant's records will be corrected as set forth in the accompanying Memorandum for
the Chief of Staff signed by the Executive Director of the Board or his designee.
Panel Chair
Attachments:
1. Ltr, AFPCDPPRS, dtd 17 Jun 98
2. Ltr, AFDPPE, dtd 6 Aug 98
D E P A R T M E N T O F THE A I R F O R C E
H E A D Q U A R T E R S AIR FORCE P E R S O N N E L C E N T E R
R A N D O L P H AIR FORCE B A S E TEXAS
MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR'
FROM: HQ AFPCDPPRS
550 C Street West Ste 11
Randolph AFB TX 78 150-47 13
The applicant, while seming in the grade of airman first class, was discharged from the Air
Force 03 Jan 98 under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Pregnancy) with an Honorable discharge.
She served 02 years, 05 months 22 days total active service.
Requested Action. The applicant is requesting her date of separation fiom active duty be
adjusted fiom 03 Jan 98 to 11 Jan 98.
Basis for Request. Applicant states she enlisted on 11 Jul95 and elected to participate in the
Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB)and made a full contribution of $1200. She requested separation for
pregnancy and was separated on 03 Jan 98, an arbitrary date. At the time, she adds, she was
unaware that she needed to serve 30 months on active duty to qual@ for the MGIB. Her
separation date was 8 days before she would have been eligible for the MGIB. She claims she
would have requested another date to be discharged if she had realize she was leaving active duty
too early to quali@ for the program. This advisory will address only the discharge processing in
the case.
Facts. On 21 Nov 97, applicant applied for early separation for pregnancy. In her application,
she indicated her reason for requesting early discharge was because of pregnancy and that she was
requesting her release date of 03 Jan 98 so that she would be able to return to her home state in
time to register for the Spring semester. Her application was approved on 21 Nov 97 for a 03 Jan
98 discharge date.
Discussion. This case has been reviewed for separation processing and there are no errors or
irregularities causing an injustice to the applicant. Her discharge complies with directives in effect
at the time of her discharge. The records indicate member's military service was reviewed and
appropriate action was taken. The Education Officer at the base where she was discharge has
provided a statement (attached) indicating that because the education counselor who processed
her was new and could have erred when it comes to VA entitlements, the applicant could very
well not have realize she would lose her MGIB with her scheduled date of separation.
Recommendation. Based on information provided in applicant’s application, information
provided by her Education Officer, we have no objection if AFBCMR provides relief and directs
applicant’s records be corrected to show she was discharged effective 11 Jan 98. She has filed a
timely request.
JOHN C. WOOTEN, DAF
Military Personnel Mgmt Spec
Separations Branch
Dir of Personnel Program Management
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
-
US. AIR FORCE
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES AIR FORCE
WASHINGTON DC
MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR
FROM: HQ USAFDPPE
1040 Air Force Pentagon
Washington, D.C. 20330-1040
I Bill Eligibility
0 6 AUG 1998
1 9 4 7 - 1 9 9 7
Public Law 98-525, the legislation which enacted the Montgomery GI Bill, requires that
individuals who first became members of the Armed Forces, or who first entered active duty
after June 30, 1985, and are participants in the Montgomery GI Bill, must serve continuously on
active duty for at least three years. Individuals who separate early are not entitled to benefits
except if discharged involuntarily, for a service connected disability, for a hardship, a reduction-
in-force, or for the convenience of the government with 30 months of service completed.
received an honorable, convenience of the government discharge, however&e only
completed 2 years, 5 months and 22 days.
RECOMMENDAT
eligibility. It appears t
8 days had she been briefed about the Montgomery GI Bill eligibility.
he 8 days required for Montgomery GI Bill
ave remained on active duty for the additional
ALBERT B. ARRIGHI, GS14, USAF
Education and Training Division
Personnel Force Development
I
qgollsJ
Golden Legacy, Boundless Future ... Your Nation’s Air Force
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C) . RECOMMENDATION: None; -oes not have the required time on active duty to qualify for educational benefits through the Department of Veterans Affairs. The applicant is requesting her DD Form 214 to state that her discharge was for the good of the government.
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 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.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Applicant’s master personnel record does not contain the discharge case file however, his DD Form 2 14 indicates his discharge was for misconduct- sexual deviation. Applicant did not identi@ any specific errors in the discharge processing nor provide facts which warrant an upgrade of the discharge he received over 15 years ago and...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C) . No other characterization of service is possible under law for service members separated within the first 6 months of entry. Applicant served only 20 days and therefore, the uncharacterized discharge is correct and in accordance with Department of Defense and Air Force directives.
P g&/pf ne1 Chair Attachment: Ltr, AFPC/DPPRS, dtd Jul 7, 1998, w/Atch DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC JUL 2 4 I998 Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 98-01571 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, and having assured compliance with the provisions of the above regulation, the decision of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records is announced, and it is directed...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03216
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPRS asserts that, based on the documentation on file in the applicant’s records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the discretion of the discharge authority. As the applicant presents no facts warranting a change to her SPD code, denial is recommended. On 3 Feb 03, she requested discharge from active duty due to pregnancy and separated on 1 May 03...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01124
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2003-01124 INDEX CODE 110.02 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her records reflect that she was discharged for the convenience of the government, not due to pregnancy, so she may be eligible for educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB). (See Exhibit F.) On 13 Aug 02, the...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Consistent with his findings, the evaluation officer recommended discharge with a general discharge certificate. The records indicate member's military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00078
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00078 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 14 JUL 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, Item 15a, “Member contributed to Post-Vietnam Era Veterans’ Educational Assistance...