RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-02986
INDEX NUMBER: 112.00
XXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None
XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No
______________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The period of lost time, 14 Sep 01 through 2 Nov 01 reflected on her DD
Form 214 be removed.
______________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
When she originally separated from service, she was not charged lost
time. Her commander at the time she separated from service indicated on
an AF Form 2098 that the period from 14 Sep 01 through 2 Nov 01 was not
determined as lost time.
In support of her appeal, the applicant provides a copy of her DD Form
214, a copy of the AF Form 2098, a copy of a bank statement, and a copy
of the DD Form 215 that changed her DD Form 214 to reflect the lost time.
The applicant’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit A.
______________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Air Force on 22 Oct 97. On 14 Sep 01,
while in the grade of senior airman, the applicant was tried by special
court martial and found guilty of two specifications of drug abuse in
violation of Article 112a of the UCMJ. The applicant was reduced to the
grade of airman basic (E-1) and sentenced to two months confinement. On
20 Sep 01, her squadron commander notified her that he was recommending
her discharge from the Air Force for drug abuse with a general
characterization of discharge. The applicant submitted a statement in
her behalf requesting that she not be discharged but allowed to separate
honorably. On 1 Oct 01, the applicant’s squadron commander recommended
to the wing commander that the applicant be discharged from service for
drug abuse with a general discharge. The wing commander approved the
recommendation and directed that the applicant be discharged from the Air
Force with a general discharge without probation and rehabilitation upon
her release from confinement.
The applicant was separated on 5 Nov 01. The DD Form 214 issued to the
applicant did not reflect that she had any lost time and therefore stated
her active service as 4 years, 14 days. On 26 Dec 01, the
applicant was issued a DD Form 215 to correct the DD Form 214. The DD
Form 215 stated the applicant’s active service as 3 years, 11 months, and
27 days and added to the remarks that the applicant did not complete her
first full term of service.
On 9 Dec 02, in response to the applicant’s AFBCMR appeal, AFPC/DPPRSP
sent her a memorandum with a new DD Form 214 explaining the changes that
were made and the reasons why. She was advised that both her original DD
Form 214 and the DD Form 215 issued to correct it were incorrect.
______________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPW provides information regarding when an Air Force member is
charged lost time. They determined that the applicant received a total
of 50 days lost time during the period she spent in military confinement.
They requested that AFPC/DPP review and verify the applicant’s service
dates on the DD Form 214.
The complete 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 20
Dec 02 for review and comment within 30 days. To date, a response has
not been received.
______________________________________________________________
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 error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, 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.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no
compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this
application.
______________________________________________________________
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 02-02986 in
Executive Session on 6 March 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Panel Chair
Ms. Barbara J. White-Olson, Member
Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 Sep 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 3 Jan 03
w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 20 Dec 02.
JOSEPH A. ROJ
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03891
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03891 INDEX NUMBER: 112.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No ______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The extension of her enlistment she entered into on 13 Dec 01 be corrected to reflect inclusive dates of 5 Jul 04 to 4 Jan 05. ______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS...
As of this date, this office has received no response. We agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility that his separation code should remain the same since he did in fact, voluntarily request discharge for the good of the service. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable material error or...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02090
The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPRRP also recommends that the applicant be compensated for five days of leave. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 11 Oct 02 for review and comment within 30 days. The Board agrees with the recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility to...
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE states the RE code the applicant received is the appropriate code for those members separated "involuntarily with an honorable discharge or an entry level separation without characterization of service (Exhibit D). _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 24 May 2002, for...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00009
The applicants military personnel records indicate he enlisted in the Air Force Reserve on 24 Jan 14, for a period of three years. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPRs), which are attached at Exhibits C, D, E, and F. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPTOS recommends denial with respect to the applicants request for his lost time to be reinstated. A complete copy of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03521
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03521 INDEX CODE: 137.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her late husband's records be corrected so that she may be eligible for a Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) annuity. They state that Public Law (PL) 98-525 permitted former spouses to submit a request to deem an SBP election change...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02986
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02986 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NOT INDICATED HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect award of the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM) and all overseas service medals he is entitled. The complete DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-00882
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-00882 INDEX CODE: 126.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Article 15 be set aside so that her discharge can be upgraded so that she may qualify for Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) benefits. The service member may then consult with a defense counsel to determine whether to accept nonjudicial...
Too much emphasis was placed on a Letter of Admonition (LOA); there was bias by the additional rater; and, the number of days of supervision is incorrect. The HQ AFPC/DPPPEP evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPPWB stated that the first time the contested report was considered in the promotion process was Cycle 01E7 to master sergeant (E-7), promotions effective Aug 01 - Jul 02. However, they do not, in the Board majority’s opinion, support a finding that the evaluators were unable to...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00420
As a result, the OPR and MSM 2OLC were not in her OSR when the CY01B board convened. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant contends by regulation the OPR was required to have been a matter of record at the time of the CY01B board. Therefore, the award cannot be included in the applicant’s OSR for CY01B board’s consideration because it did not exist when...