Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00209
Original file (BC-2006-00209.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-00209
      INDEX CODE:  110.00; 110.02
      COUNSEL:  NONE

      HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE:  24 MAY 2007

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:


Her  narrative  reason  for  separation  be  changed  from   “pregnancy   or
childbirth” to “hardship.”

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her narrative reason for separation should state hardship not pregnancy.

She  submitted  no  supporting  documentation.   The  applicant’s   complete
submission is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 1 April 1998, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the  age
of 19 in the grade of  airman  basic  for  a  period  of  four  years.   She
completed basic military training and  technical  training  school  and  was
assigned duties as a postal specialist.  She served 1 year, 9 months and  28
days on active duty.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

DPPRS recommends denial  of  the  applicant’s  request.   DPPRS  states  she
voluntarily submitted a request for separation under the provisions  of  AFI
36-3208, paragraph 3.17 (pregnancy or childbirth), with  an  effective  date
of 10 May 2000.  This is documented by an AF Form 31, Airman’s  Request  for
Early Separation/Separation Based on Change in Service Obligation, dated  27
March 2000.

DPPRS affirms based on the documentation in the  master  personnel  records,
the  separation  was  consistent  with  the   procedural   and   substantive
requirements of the discharge regulation and the discharge  was  within  the
discretion of the separation authority.  DPPRS notes the applicant  did  not
submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices  that  occurred  in
the  separation  processing.   DPPRS  concludes   the   separation   program
designator  and  narrative  reason  for  separation  are  correct   and   no
corrective action is required (Exhibit C).

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded  to  the  applicant  on  10
February 2006 for review and comment.  As of  this  date,  this  office  has
received no response.

________________________________________________________________

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.   We  find  no   impropriety   in   the
characterization of the applicant's discharge.  Available  records  indicate
her request for separation  for  pregnancy  or  childbirth  was  voluntarily
submitted, and it appears that  responsible  officials  applied  appropriate
standards in effecting the separation; thus, 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 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  AFBMCR  BC-2006-00209  in
Executive Session on 18 May 2006 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
            Ms. LeLoy W. Cottrell, Member
      Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 16 Jan 06.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  HQ AFPC/DPPRS Letter, dated 6 Feb 06.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Feb 06.




                                   MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00078

    Original file (BC-2006-00078.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00078 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 14 JUL 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, Item 15a, “Member contributed to Post-Vietnam Era Veterans’ Educational Assistance...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03839

    Original file (BC-2005-03839.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    According to her separation document, she was discharged on 31 October 2003 for “pregnancy or childbirth.” ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial. DPPRS states the applicant’s voluntary request for separation is not on file in the master personnel records; however, based on available documentation, it appears the applicant voluntarily submitted an application for separation under the provisions of AFI 36-3208...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01150

    Original file (BC-2006-01150.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01150 INDEX CODE: 100.00, 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 19 OCTOBER 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00055

    Original file (BC-2006-00055.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00055 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 9 Jul 07 ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Separation Program Designator (SPD) code be changed to a code that does not require repayment of the unearned portion of her Selective Reenlistment Bonus...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03216

    Original file (BC-2004-03216.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPRS asserts that, based on the documentation on file in the applicant’s records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the discretion of the discharge authority. As the applicant presents no facts warranting a change to her SPD code, denial is recommended. On 3 Feb 03, she requested discharge from active duty due to pregnancy and separated on 1 May 03...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02958

    Original file (BC-2005-02958.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02958 INDEX CODE: 128.10 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 28 JANUARY 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be relieved from her Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) debt. On 21 January 2005, she enlisted in the Air Force Reserve PALACE FRONT program for one year. DPPRS concludes the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02067

    Original file (BC-2006-02067.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02067 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 14 Jan 08 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03605

    Original file (BC-2002-03605.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03605 INDEX CODE: 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2X (First-term, second-term or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the SRP) be changed. Applicant’s record does not contain a discharge case file or the commander’s...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01124

    Original file (BC-2003-01124.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2003-01124 INDEX CODE 110.02 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her records reflect that she was discharged for the convenience of the government, not due to pregnancy, so she may be eligible for educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB). (See Exhibit F.) On 13 Aug 02, the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03392

    Original file (BC-2003-03392.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Due to the circumstances of her case, she should have been discharged under a hardship reason, not pregnancy or childbirth. The applicant, while serving in the grade of airman first class, was discharged from the Air Force on 31 December 2001 under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen (pregnancy or childbirth), with an honorable discharge. A complete copy of the...