RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01798
INDEX CODE: 100.01
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
All military computer records indicating his sex as male be changed to
reflect female.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Gender reassignment surgery was performed on 31 Jul 98. She is
anatomically female and as does other women, requires typical gynecological
medical services. Since she is female, her military medical records should
indicate female as her gender.
In support of her request, applicant provided a copy of her birth
certificate, a letter from her physician, her driver's license, AF Form
218, Notification of change in Service Member's Official Records; and her
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant served on active duty as J--- M. W--- for 22 years and 12 days.
He retired from the Regular Air Force on 30 Sep 87 in the grade of chief
master sergeant. Subsequent to his name change and gender reassignment on
31 Jul 98, the applicant submitted an application to the Board requesting a
DD Form 214 correction to reflect the name as J---- Marie W----. By a
majority vote, the Board denied the request. A copy of the Record of
Proceeding is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSAMP recommends denial of the applicant's request. DPSAMP states
that Air Force personnel records correctly reflects the applicant's name
and gender during the period of service and on the date of retirement. The
current name and gender does not mirror the name and gender information in
the personnel record. Therefore, correcting the applicant's historical
records is an unjustified action. Any organization attempting to verify
the applicant's service will ask for the DD Form 214. In this case the DD
Form 214 is correct as of the date of retirement. As such, the applicant
would have to provide the organization additional information concerning
the difference between the DD Form 214 and present circumstances. The Air
Force and Department of Defense has no procedures in place in regard to
this type of change. Her records correctly reflect the legal name/gender
under which the applicant served and retired. The DPSAMP evaluation is at
Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Applicant states that she successfully petitioned the --- State Department
of Health, Vital Records Bureau to correct her birth certificate. She is
physically and functionally female and if called back to active duty, she
would have to report as a woman. In support of her request, applicant
provided additional copies of documents previously submitted. The
applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________
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 failure to timely file.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of error or injustice. The applicant's decision to change his
name and gender was a personal decision that was made subsequent to
military service. The correct name and gender during the period of service
and at the time of retirement are reflected in the applicant's military
records. It is our opinion that alteration of her records, to include
computer records, would be inappropriate. Therefore, we agree with the
opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary
responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion
that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.
Absent persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to
recommend granting the relief sought in this application.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown
that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to
our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request for a
hearing is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
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 Docket Number 02-01798 n
Executive Session on 12 Feb 03, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Albert F. Lowas, Jr, Panel Chair
Mr. James W. Russell III, Member
Mr. William H. Anderson, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 May 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSAMP, dated 3 Jan 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Jan 03.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 23 Jan 03, w/atchs
ALBERT F. LOWAS, JR.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-00989
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00989 INDEX CODE 100.01 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The DD Form 214 issued upon retirement be changed to reflect the current legal name of “------.” rather than “-----.” _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: On 12 February 2002, she...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02341
The law was later changed and after 1 Feb 78, female officers and enlisted incurred a six-year MSO upon entering active duty. The DD Form 4 she signed at that time credited her with two years of inactive military service. Under that change, a six- year MSO would have been authorized for females who were enlisting in the Air Force by the time the applicant separated in 1979 but not for those, like the applicant, who enlisted prior to 1978.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: 00-00868 INDEX CODE 100.01 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The military records be changed to show a name and gender of “Holly E.” and “female” rather than “Stephen R.” and “male.” _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The Department of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02326
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02326 INDEX CODE: 100.03, 100.06 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to allow enlistment in the Air Force Reserves. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She completed her active duty service...
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force. According to AFI 36- 2107, Active Duty Service Commitments, IC 2001-1, paragraph 2.10- 1.2.2, the MPF commander briefs members on Seven-Day option, using the statements for ADSC declination. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...
To grant the relief sought would cause undue administrative burdens on the military records custodian in the correction of records that were not recorded in error. The original male name and gender on Chief ’s DD Form 214 were correct at the time the document was issued; 2. CHARLENE M. BRADLEY Panel Chair Attachment: Record of Proceedings AFBCMR 98-02489 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR) SUBJECT: I have carefully reviewed the...
He received an LOR on 7 Apr 82 for failing to report for duty on 3 April 82. On 17 May 83, after consulting with counsel, the applicant requested discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his UOTHC discharge should be upgraded to honorable or general.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03640
The DPPAC evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 3 Jan 03 for review and comment within 30 days. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPAC, dated 13 Dec 02, w/atch.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-00011
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00011 INDEX CODE: 110.03, 131.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. Her pay records be corrected to show that on 1 Sep 99 she was authorized payment of $1,395.92 and that she was relieved of her indebtedness. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03408
His last five EPRs reflect the following: CLOSING DATE RATING REASON FOR REPORT 29 Apr 97 5 Annual (365 days) 29 Apr 98 5 Annual (365 days) 29 Apr 00 5 Annual (366 days) 31 Oct 00 5 Change of Reporting Official (185 days) 26 Jan 02 5 Annual (120 days) The applicant did not submit an appeal to the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB). A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...