Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9900466
Original file (9900466.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  99-00466
            INDEX CODE 113.04
            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be allowed to serve  his  contractual  service  obligation  in  the
Reserves [rather than on active duty], or to reimburse the  Air  Force
for his educational expense.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The reasons applicant believes he has been  the  victim  of  an  error
and/or an injustice are contained in his complete submission, which is
at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from  the
applicant's military records, are contained in the letter prepared  by
the appropriate office of the Air Force.   Accordingly,  there  is  no
need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.

Additional relevant facts are:

      -   By EAD order dated 1 April 1999, the applicant  was  ordered
to extended active duty (EAD) effective 27 July 1999  with  assignment
to the 72nd Medical Operations Squadron at Tinker AFB, OK. In a 24 May
1999 letter to the Directorate of  Assignments,  HQ  AFPC/DPAMF2,  the
applicant requested that the EAD orders be withdrawn, contending he is
not subject to active duty orders while his case is pending before the
AFBCMR.

      -  According to AFI 36-2110, the  Humanitarian  Program  assists
people in resolving severe  short-term  problems  involving  a  family
member. The spirit and intent of the program is to place a  member  at
the closest location where the problem  exists.  The  member  must  be
effectively used in his/her duty AFSC. The Comptroller  General  ruled
that the Air Force must not make moves  at  government  expense  based
solely on humanitarian reasons. As a result, there  must  be  a  valid
vacant Air Force authorization at the gaining base.   The  Exceptional
Family Member Program (EFMP)  is  designed  to  ensure  dependents  of
military members receive the special medical or educational care  they
require at the current or projected duty  location.   The  spirit  and
intent of the EFMP is  to  assign  individuals  based  on  current  or
projected  manning  requirements  at  locations  where  the   required
services are available. The dependent  may  receive  services  by  the
military medical system or through civilian resources  using  CHAMPUS.
These two programs are “self-initiated,” i.e., a member must apply for
them.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The  Chief,  Physician  Education  Branch,  HQ  AFPC/DPAME,   provided
relevant facts  pertaining  to  this  appeal  and  the  rationale  for
recommending denial.

A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant provided a rebuttal to the evaluation and reiterated his
earlier contentions. He presents three options, one of  which  is  for
him to pay back in a lump sum the total  costs  incurred  by  the  Air
Force, or that he be allowed to serve in the Reserves rather  than  on
active duty.

Applicant provided an additional rebuttal,  advising  that  his  uncle
suffered  a  stroke;  he  provides  a  supporting  statement  from   a
physician.

Complete copies of applicant’s responses,  with  attachments,  are  at
Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.    The applicant has exhausted all remedies  provided  by  existing
law or regulations.

2.    The application was timely filed.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of probable error or injustice.  After a thorough review
of the evidence of record  and  applicant’s  submission,  we  are  not
persuaded  that  the  requested  relief  is   warranted.   Applicant’s
contentions are duly noted; however, we do not find these  assertions,
in  and  by  themselves,  sufficiently  persuasive  to  override   the
rationale provided by the Air Force. The  Physician  Education  Branch
advises the applicant has been offered  the  option  of  applying  for
participation  in  the  Humanitarian  or  Exceptional  Family   Member
Programs. This seems to be a reasonable  suggestion  that  would  both
serve the best interests of the Air Force and accommodate the needs of
the applicant. He has not provided convincing evidence  compelling  us
to  grant  his  suggested  remedies.  We  therefore  agree  with   the
recommendations of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed  as
the basis for our decision that the applicant has  failed  to  sustain
his burden of having suffered either an error or an injustice. In view
of the above, we recommend this application be denied.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of probable  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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 9 September 1999 under the provisions of AFI  36-
2603:

                 Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member
                 Mr. John E. Pettit, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 Feb 99, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPAME, dated 24 Feb 99, w/atchs.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 15 Mar 99.
   Exhibit D.  Letters, Applicant, dated 20 Mar  & 29 Jul 99,
                  w/atchs.




                                   DAVID C. VAN GASBECK
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802894

    Original file (9802894.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The reasons applicant believes he has been the victim of an error and/or an injustice are contained in his complete submission, which is at Exhibit A. The Officer Verification Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPAOR, also reviewed the case and provided a technical advisory pertaining to the DOR computation. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his DOR...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9803578

    Original file (9803578.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant requested an additional year of unfunded training from 1 Jul 98 to 30 Jun 99 for fellowship training in spine surgery; however, this request was denied by DPAME. Constructive credit is awarded once an individual enters active duty; HPSP graduates can be, and frequently are, deferred from active duty upon completion of medical school to obtain residency training (they enter active duty upon completion of their training program); and, USUHS students contractually must go to an...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01245

    Original file (BC-2004-01245.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Of particular note in the SOU: -- Paragraph 1 advised his ADSC at the time of his requested separation from AD was 2 years, 11 months and 6 days based on the HPSP and Internal Medicine residency sponsorship at Wright Patterson AFB obligation. In view of his prior selection for promotion to major while on AD and that General Cardiologists with no prior military experience were commissioned in the grade of major, on 14 Oct 03, the Board recommended as an alternative remedy that he be promoted...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802548

    Original file (9802548.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    a, second sentence: “I will enter graduate professional education, as selected and directed by the Air Force, immediately following graduation from medical school.”) The recruiter, who was in his first year as a Health Professions Scholarships Program (HPSP) recruiter, was unable to answer whether [the applicant] would have a free selection of a specialty option without influence by the Air Force. A copy of the complete Air Force evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02770

    Original file (BC-2003-02770.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 2 Jul 98, applicant requested a hardship discharge based on family difficulties. At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of their separation. Additionally, we note the assigned RE code of 4A is a code that can be waived for prior service enlistment consideration, provided applicant meets all other requirements for enlistment under an existing prior service program, and depending on...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02863

    Original file (BC-2002-02863.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    At that time, an Air Force Form 1466 (Medical and Educational Clearance for Travel) was initiated, which officially prevented his son from joining him at his duty station until the required medical care was available or his son no longer needed such care. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ USAF/DPPCC recommends that the applicant’s request for FSA be denied. Specifically, the applicant states 37 U.S.C., Section 427(c)(2), authorizes...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002963

    Original file (0002963.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 29 Dec 00 for review and response within 30 days. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that competent authority deferred until 1 January 2003, the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9901160

    Original file (9901160.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Reasons for the commander’s recommendation was that the applicant made a signed statement to the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (OSI) indicating his homosexual involvement with another male member. On 14 August 1959, he was discharged in the grade of airman second class, under the provisions of AFR 39-17 (Unfitness - Homosexual), receiving an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802531

    Original file (9802531.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9900849

    Original file (9900849.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Physician Education Branch, HQ AFPC/DPAME, reviewed this application and states that applicant signed her Health Professions Scholarship Program Contract (HPSP), thereby agreeing to the terms of the contract. Thus, by reports or physical examination required by the service, with results known to the service, the service in 1987 and again in 1989 knew of applicant’s endometriosis and further...