Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02716
Original file (BC-2006-02716.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02716
            INDEX CODE:  110.00, 110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  4 MARCH 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her separation and reenlistment eligibility  (RE)  codes  be  changed  to  a
favorable code that would permit her to enter the MI Air National Guard.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her narrative reason for separation “Inability to perform prescribed  duties
due to parenthood,” no longer applies.  At the time  of  her  discharge  her
husband was deployed to Saudi Arabia and they  had  dependent  care  issues.
Her spouse has since retired from the Armed Forces and there is no longer  a
problem with dependent care of minor children.

In support of her request, applicant provided a  copy  of  her      DD  Form
214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.

The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 13 Aug 85, for  a  period  of
four years in the grade of airman basic.

On 11 Sep 90, the squadron commander notified  the  applicant  that  he  was
recommending she be discharged from the Air Force  for  failure  to  fulfill
dependent care responsibilities.  The commander  recommended  the  applicant
receive an honorable discharge.

On 11 Sep 90, applicant acknowledged receipt of the  discharge  notification
and that she had consulted  with  military  counsel.   Applicant  offered  a
conditional  waiver  of  the  rights  associated  with   an   administrative
discharge board hearing, contingent on  her  receipt  of  no  less  than  an
honorable discharge

On 19 Sep 90, the  Headquarters  Air  Force  Logistics  Center  Staff  Judge
Advocate reviewed the case file and found it legally sufficient  to  support
separation and recommended applicant’s conditional waiver be accepted.   The
discharge authority  approved  the  separation  and  directed  applicant  be
discharged   with   an   honorable   discharge   without    probation    and
rehabilitation.

On 24 Sep 90, the applicant was honorably discharged  under  the  provisions
of AFR 39-10, with separation code  HDG  (Inability  to  perform  prescribed
duties due to parenthood), and was issued an RE code  of  2C  (Involuntarily
separated with an honorable discharge).  She was credited with  5  years,  1
month, and 22 days of active military service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPAE recommends denial.   A  review  of  the  applicant’s  military
records revealed that she was recommended for discharge from the  Air  Force
for failure to  fulfill  dependent  care  responsibilities.   Based  on  the
circumstances of her discharge, they found no evidence that the  applicant’s
RE code is incorrect; additionally the applicant should  seek  a  waiver  of
the RE code by the enlisting component authority.

The DPPAE evaluation, with attachments is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied,  and  states,  in  part,
based on the documentation on file in  the  master  personnel  records,  the
discharge was consistent with the procedural  and  substantive  requirements
of the discharge regulation.  The discharge was  within  the  discretion  of
the discharge authority.

The applicant did  not  submit  any  evidence  or  identify  any  errors  or
injustices that occurred in the  discharge  processing.   Additionally,  the
applicant  provided  no  facts  warranting  a  change  to  her  reenlistment
eligibility code.

The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 6 Oct 06, a copy of  the  Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant for review and comment within 30 days.   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  took  notice  of  the  applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the  case;  however,  we  agree
with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force  offices  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     BC-2006-
02716 in Executive Session on 14 November 2006, under the provisions of  AFI
36-2603:

      Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Panel Chair
      Ms. Mary C. Puckett, Member
      Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Member

The following documentary evidence  pertaining  to  Docket  Number  BC-2006-
02716 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 31 Aug 06, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 29 Sep 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 20 Sep 06.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Oct 06.




                                             LAURENCE M. GRONER
                                             Panel Chair


Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01127

    Original file (BC-2006-01127.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    His separation be changed to a medical discharge. The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Apr 06, w/atchs. LAURENCE M. GRONER Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2006-01127 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, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that: The pertinent military records of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0102034

    Original file (0102034.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 4 Dec 90, the applicant was notified that her commander was recommending that she be discharged from the Air Force for parenthood. On 27 Nov 90, she received a Letter of Admonishment reprimanding her for failing to provide the squadron with Dependent Care Certification, as was her duty to provide by 19 Nov 90. A complete copy of their letter is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02356

    Original file (BC-2006-02356.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    DPPRS states based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. _________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: A majority of the Board finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be denied. LAURENCE M. GRONER Panel...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02356

    Original file (BC-2006-02356.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    DPPRS states based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. _________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: A majority of the Board finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be denied. LAURENCE M. GRONER Panel...

  • 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 | CY2003 | BC-2002-03241

    Original file (BC-2002-03241.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 29 Aug 00, the applicant received notification that she was being recommended for discharge for erroneous enlistment. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicant’s submission, we are unpersuaded that the requested relief should be approved.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01106

    Original file (BC-2007-01106.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied, and states, in part, based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s complete submission, the Board is of the opinion there was no deliberate deception on the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00648

    Original file (BC-2003-00648.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPPAE indicated that the applicant’s RE code of “2C” - Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge, or entry-level separation without characterization of service is correct. The evaluation is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant provided a response that is at Exhibit G. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0100194

    Original file (0100194.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Medical Consultant further states that no error or injustice has occurred in the applicant's case and he recommends no change in the records. However, if the Board were to offer administrative relief, they would recommend changing her separation and narrative reason to "JFF- Secretarial Authority" (Exhibit D). The Chief, Skill Management Branch, Directorate, Personnel Program Management, AFPC/DPPAES, also reviewed the application and states the reenlistment eligibility code "2C" is the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00568

    Original file (BC-2004-00568.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00568 INDEX NUMBER: 110.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Separation Code of “JBK,” discharged after completion of required service, be changed. Her “2X” Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code, “First-term, second-term, or career airman considered but not selected for...