RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2001-03343
                       INDEX CODE: 110.00

      XXXXXXX          COUNSEL:  GARY MYERS

                       HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  14 Sep 07

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His first name on his DD Form 214  and  Request  &  Authorization  for
Separation be changed from L-- D-- (female) to M-- D-- (male).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

After separating from the Air Force, he underwent a legal name change.
 He wants to ensure his DD Form 214 and other  records  are  corrected
accordingly.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is  at  Exhibit
A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered active duty on 20 May 89 and served as a surgeon
until he requested separation effective 30 Jun 01.  The applicant  was
twice nonselected for promotion to the grade  of  lieutenant  colonel.
As a result, after 12 years, 1 month, and 11 days of  active  service,
the applicant was honorably discharged [sic] from active duty  in  the
grade of major on 30 Jun 01.

On 1 Oct 01, the XXXXXXX,  CA,  Superior  Court  legally  changed  the
applicant’s name from L-- (female) to M-- (male).

In a DD Form 149 dated 10 Nov 01 (Exhibit A), the applicant  requested
his DD Form 214  and  military  records  reflect  his  new  name.   He
submitted his military  ID  card,  his  driver’s  license  and  Social
Security card, all reflecting his new first name.

On 26 Dec 01, HQ AFPC/DPPRSP advised the applicant his DD Form 214 had
been corrected to reflect he was  released,  rather  than  discharged,
from active duty and transferred to the  Air  Force  Reserves  (USAFR)
with a Reserve obligation date of 29 Jun 04 (Exhibit A).  However,  HQ
Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC) indicated they  could  not  change
his female first name on that  document.   His  application  would  be
forwarded to HQ ARPC regarding the name  change  issue  based  on  the
facts of his release.

By letter  dated  24 Mar  04,  the  applicant’s  counsel  queried  the
Director of the Air Force Review  Boards  Agency  about  changing  the
applicant’s name on his DD Form 214 (Exhibit A).  Counsel advised  his
client underwent a sex change operation from  female  to  male  and  a
first name change from L-- to M--.  He  contended  various  public  or
quasi-public institutions had  corrected  their  records  accordingly.
The DD Form 214 is a critical  document  which  has  continual  public
exposure as one passes through life.  It is essential this document be
changed; it was not completely clear to him why it could not be.  Both
the DD Form 214 and  the  Request  and  Authorization  for  Separation
should be changed to reflect the requested name.

On 28 Jul 04, HQ ARPC/DPS advised the applicant his DD Form 149  would
not  be  referred  to  the  AFBCMR  because  his  “record”  had   been
administratively changed to reflect his name as M-- D-- (Exhibit A).

On 23 Nov 04, the AFBCMR Deputy  Executive  Director  advised  counsel
that HQ AFPC had administratively resolved  to  reflect  his  client’s
name as M-- D-- on the DD Form 214 (Exhibit A).

On 5 Dec 05, HQ ARPC/PSDD1 advised the applicant his request  to  have
his name changed to M-- D-- on his DD Form 214 was prohibited because,
at the time of his separation from active duty, the DD  Form  214  was
correctly issued to reflect the name of L-- D-- (Exhibit A).  His name
change was posted to his military personnel record jacket and  in  the
personnel data system.  Air Force records policy  was  not  to  change
documents located within the records jacket to show changed items such
as a Social Security number or name.  He was referred  to  the  AFBCMR
for any further action.

By Email dated 21 Feb 06, counsel demanded HQ ARPC immediately  change
the applicant’s name per the AFBCMR’s 23 Nov 04  letter  (Exhibit  A).
By letter dated 22 Feb 06, the HQ ARPC attorney cited HQ  ARPC/PSDD1’s
5 Dec 05 letter and explained to counsel his client’s record had  been
administratively changed for all  future  documentation  (Exhibit  A).
However, the documents that are the federal record  of  past  military
relationship could not  be  administratively  changed.   Further,  the
AFBCMR had not directed HQ ARPC to make any changes.

On 6 Mar 06, counsel wrote to the AFBCMR Executive Director contending
the AFBCMR and his client were misled by  HQ  ARPC  (Exhibit  A).   He
requested  the  AFBCMR  remedy  the  situation.   As  a  result,   the
applicant’s case was reopened.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ ARPC/DPS recommends denial.  They concede their 28 Jul 04 letter to
the applicant was not clear in that the  name  change  could  only  be
proactive, not retroactive, precluding change  to  his  DD  Form  214.
They complied with AFI 36-2608, Military Personnel Record System.  The
applicant’s name on his Military Personnel Record (MPR) cover  and  in
the military personnel  data  system  was  changed.   Because  of  the
historical nature of the records, they do not change the name on other
documents within the record to include the DD Form 214.  This  request
is no different from that of military members who change their name as
a result of marriage or other legal proceeding.  When that occurs, the
member requests the record be changed to reflect the new name.  As  in
this case, only the AF Form 10 (Unit Personnel Record Group)  and  the
military personnel data system are changed.

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

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Counsel  rebutted  the  advisory  opinion,  contending  this  case  is
different from that of a military member who changes his/her name as a
result of marriage or legal proceeding because his client was a  woman
and is now a man.  Only the DD Form 214 need be changed because, as  a
plastic surgeon, the applicant utilizes this  document  for  licensure
applications and other professional matters.  As the  Social  Security
number has not changed, the applicant’s military records  are  readily
identifiable for national security and other purposes.

A copy of counsel’s rebuttal is at Exhibit D.

By letter dated 13 Jun 06, the AFBCMR Staff forwarded sanitized copies
of Records of Proceedings (ROPs) of similar  cases  decided  by  other
AFBCMR panels to counsel  for  review  within  20  days  (Exhibit  E).
Copies of these ROPs would be provided for the Board’s review.

Counsel responded contending the related case does not reflect today’s
reality.  His client is required to disclose his military status on  a
regular basis, which shows he is a woman.  His client is not  a  freak
but a male physician with nothing feminine about
him.  Every “civilized governmental agency on the planet” has  changed
his name.  Counsel respectfully requests his client’s name on  the  DD
Form 214 be changed.

Counsel’s complete response is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  While we are  not  unmindful  of
the applicant’s situation, the fact remains he had a female  name  and
gender during his military service and at the time of  his  discharge.
Therefore, the DD Form 214 is correct as issued.  The applicant’s name
has been administratively changed on  his  record  cover  and  in  the
military personnel data system, but the historical  documents  in  his
record reflect the name and  gender  he  had  at  the  time  of  their
origination.  Further,  the  applicant  has  not  established  to  our
satisfaction the name and gender inconsistencies cause such harm  that
an exception to the policy applied to  others  similarly  situated  is
warranted.  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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 13 September 2006 under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

                 Mr. Michael J. Maglio, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Gary G. Sauner, Member
                 Ms. Teri G. Spoutz, Member

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2001-03343 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Nov 01, and Counsel’s
                  Letters, dated 24 Mar 04 and 6 Mar 06, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Letter, HQ ARPC/DPS, dated 21 Mar 06, w/atchs.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Mar 06.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, Counsel, dated 2 May 06, w/atchs.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 13 Jun 06.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, Counsel, dated 14 Aug 06.




                                   MICHAEL J. MAGLIO
                                   Panel Chair