c
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET "MBER: 98-01523
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
#
FEB 51999
Applicant requests that her narrative reason for separation be
changed to reflect that' she was forced out due to the
deactivation of the 325th Transportation Squadron, Tyndall AFB,
on 31 Dec 97, so that she can receive the unemployment benefits
she deserves. Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A.
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request
and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the
application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were
forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D).
As of this date, no response has been received by this office.
After careful consideration of applicant's request and the
available evidence of record, w e find insufficient evidence of
error or injustice to warrant corrective action. The facts and
opinions stated in the advisory opinions appear to be based on
the evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant.
Absent persuasive evidence applicant was 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 t.ime the
application was filed.
Members of the Board Mr. Henry C. Saunders, Ms. Ann L. Heidig,
and Ms. Sophie A . Clark considered this application on 10 Dec 98
in accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 3 6 -
2603 and the governing statute, 10
Exhibits :
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
8. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinions
D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinions
D E P A R T M E N T OF THE A I R FORCE
HEADQUARTERS.. AIR FORCE PERSONNEL CENTER
RANDOLPH AIR FORCE BASE TEXAS
MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR
~
FROM: HQ AFPC/DPPRS
550 C Street West Ste 1 1
Randolph AFB TX 781 50-4713
;JuN 2 4 398
The applicant, while serving in the grade of senior airman, was separated fiom the Air Force 3 1
Dec 97 under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Voluntary-Miscellaneous Reasons) with an
Honorable discharge. She served 03 years, 09 months 04 days total active service.
Requested Action. The applicant is requesting her DD Form 214 be corrected to reflect that
she was forced out due to the deactivation of her unit on 3 1 Dec 97, so she can receive
unemployment.
Basis for Request. Applicant states there was a particular reason for her getting out of the Air
Force. She indicates the choices given her at the close of the A-76 study were to either reenlist,
extend to take another assignment or to separate fiom the Air Force. Her husband was getting
transferred to
so she elected to separate 3 months early.
Facts. Applicant's master personnel record does contain an AJ? Form 3 1 (Request for Early
Separation) which she submitted to request early separation. In her application, she indicated she
did not have enough retainability for an assignment and did not wish to obtain it, therefore, she
requested an early separation date using miscellaneous reason. The Air Force approved just what
she ask for at the time of her application.
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.
Recommendation. Applicant did not identi& any specific errors in the discharge processing nor
provide facts which warrant a change in her reason for separation. Accordingly, we recommend
applicant's request be denied. She has filed a timely request.
YOHN C. WOO'fkN, DAF
Military Personnel Mgmt 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). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). The applicant voluntarily requested early separation from the Air Force for miscellaneous reasons and the request was approved for his separation to be effective 06 Aug 97.
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). 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.
As a result, we recommend denial of the 8.. OGAN,C t,USAF Chief, Skills c \ DEPARTMENT O F THE AIR FORCE HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE PERSONNEL CENTER R A N D O L P H AIR FORCE B A S E TEXAS MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR FROM HQ AFPC/JA (Maj Reed) 550 C Street West Ste 44 Randolph AFB TX 78 150-4746 SUBJECT: Application for Correction of Military Records - c 30 January 1998 - REOUESTED ACTION: ADDlicantmxmests that her home of record OKOR) be changed fro BASIS FOR REQUEST: Applicant believes that it is an...
She requested separation for pregnancy and was separated on 03 Jan 98, an arbitrary date. Her separation date was 8 days before she would have been eligible for the MGIB. 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...
, ' JUN 3 0 1996 Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 9 8 - 0 0 0 6 9 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Under the authority of Section 1 5 5 2 , Title 10, United States Code, and Air Force Instruction 3 6 - 2 6 0 3 , 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: The pertinen Force relating to show that 2 8 days o commencing 2 October 1 9 9 7 ; and, at...
Based on the evidence provided, they recommend denial of applicant's request. Facts of military justice action: On 24 Jul89, the applicant (then Sergwt) was notified of his commander’s intent to impose nonjudicial punishment upon him for: (1) failing to go to his appointed place of duty, i.e., the LOX service plant, at the time prescribed, on 15 3ul89, in violation of Article 86, UCMJ; and, (2) for being derelict in the performance of his duties on 15 Jul89, by failing to service the LOX...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). At the time she was placed on TDRL, promotion testing was being conducted for the 96E6 cycle. Although she is requesting supplemental promotion consideration to TSgt for the 97E6 cycle, she was ineligible for consideration because she was not on active duty.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C. The Chief, Appeals & SSB Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPA, also evaluated the case and would have no objection to the applicant meeting an SSB with the 25 November 1996 OPR in her records and the requested duty title change made to the CY97A OSB. The applicant, a medical service corps officer, requests special selection board (SSB) consideration for the CY97A (3 Feb 97) (P0497A) major board, With inclusion of the officer performance report...