Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03482
Original file (BC-2005-03482.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-03482
            INDEX NUMBER:  110.00
      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  None

      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED:  No


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  14 May 07


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  Separation  Code,  “KND,”  “Miscellaneous/General  Reasons,”   be
changed to one that will not require him  to  repay  the  reenlistment
bonus he received.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was discharged for force reduction and it was “explicitly clear” he
was not responsible for paying back his bonus.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered active duty on 28 Aug 96.   On  26  Jul  04,  he
submitted a request for early separation requesting he be separated on
10 Jan 05 under the Limited Active  Duty  Service  Commitment  (LADSC)
Waiver program and AFI 36-3208, paragraph 3.15 (misc reasons).  On  30
Jun 04, the applicant signed a “Statement of Understanding for  Member
Applying for Retirement/Separation Under the Force  Shaping  Program,”
acknowledging the following:   “I  understand  that  if  I  retire  or
separate prior to completing the period of active  duty  I  agreed  to
serve for receiving education assistance, special pay or bonus  money,
I will reimburse the Air Force  a  percentage  of  the  cost  involved
unless otherwise specified in this MPFM.”  The applicant’s application
was approved.  He was discharged for miscellaneous/general reasons  on
10 Jan 05 and given a separation code of “KND.”

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial of the applicant’s request.  Based on the
documentation on file in the records, the applicant’s  separation  was
consistent with the procedural and  substantive  requirements  of  the
discharge regulations.  They also note that  the  applicant  signed  a
statement of understanding indicating that if he retired or  separated
prior to completing the period of active duty he agreed to  serve  for
receiving education assistance, special pay or bonus money,  he  would
reimburse the Air Force a  percentage  of  the  cost  involved  unless
otherwise  specified  in  the  applicable  Military  Personnel  Flight
Memorandum.

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
13 Jan 06 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 its 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  BC-2005-
03482 in Executive Session on 22 February 2006, under  the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

      Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
      Mr. James W. Russell, III, Member
      Mr. Richard K. Hartley, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Aug 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 10 Jan 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Jan 06.




                                   CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
                                   Panel Chair


Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00321

    Original file (BC-2006-00321.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00321 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His record be corrected to show his Separation Program Designator (SPD) code as one that reflects a separation under the Palace Chase program instead of “MND”, “Miscellaneous/General...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03541

    Original file (BC-2005-03541.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    DFAS-POCC/DE states the applicant was discharged with an SPD code of MND. The applicant asserts that he was told by his officers that he would not have to repay his SEB when he voluntarily submitted a request for separation under the LADSC Waiver Program. JAMES W. RUSSELL III Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2005-03541 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02095

    Original file (BC-2005-02095.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She previously filed a complaint with the Inspector General (IG) office at her base of assignment when she separated from the Air Force regarding the requirements for repayment of SRBs and has not received a response. Although the evidence indicates the policy was properly applied in her case, it appears she believes a class of Air Force personnel, i.e., those involuntarily separated for misconduct,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02363

    Original file (BC-2005-02363.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02363 INDEX NUMBER: 128.05 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: No MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 25 Jan 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The requirement for him to repay the unearned portion of the enlistment bonus he received be waived. The applicant applied for separation from the Air Force under the Air...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01051

    Original file (BC-2006-01051.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPPRS’s complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant responded to the Air Force Advisory by explaining his options for early separation from the Air Force and how he arrived at his decision to separate early. The Board notes that airmen separating under the Palace Chase program incur a service commitment double that of their remaining active duty commitment. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03679

    Original file (BC-2005-03679.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPM states the applicant voluntarily did not complete his term of enlistment; therefore, SRB termination and recoupment is mandatory. The DPPRSR evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He feels he is due the SRB money for his EAD time in the Reserve and while on his AGR tour because he has continued to serve in the 1C6XX career field. Even though he is in the Air Force Reserve, he is still...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00033

    Original file (BC-2006-00033.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    His DD Form 214 reflects a Separation Code of “MND” and a Narrative Reason of “Miscellaneous/General Reasons.” The remaining 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 at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied. After a thorough review of the evidence of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01336

    Original file (BC-2006-01336.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01336 INDEX CODE: COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 6 Nov 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The recoupment action of the Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) be terminated. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03748

    Original file (BC-2005-03748.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Air Force Colonel Management Office (AFCMO) recommends denial of the applicant’s request for reimbursement. The Air Force has no statutory authority to reimburse expenses for which no entitlement exists. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01691

    Original file (BC-2005-01691.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Available documentation in the applicant’s records indicated that on 22 Jul 04, he requested to be separated from active duty on 1 Jan 05 according to AFI 36-3208, Chapter 3, Paragraph 3.14. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPR evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 24 Jun 05 for review and response. As of this...