RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01144
INDEX CODE: 108.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her records be corrected to show she was entitled to either separation
pay or disability severance pay.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Since her discharge was based on a mental disorder, she should be
allowed to receive separation pay. The Finance Service Office at
Eglin AFB informed her that separation pay was not payable since she
did not serve the minimum of six years of active service.
In support of her request, the applicant provided a copy of her
discharge orders and her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or
Discharge from Active Duty. Her complete submission, with
attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force (RegAF) on 16 Sep 03.
On 26 Jun 06, she was honorably discharged under the provisions of Air
Force Instruction (AFI) 36-3208 with a narrative reason for separation
of “personality disorder” and with separation program designator (SPD)
code “JFX.” She served 2 years, 9 months and 11 days on active duty.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR STAFF EVALUATION:
The Defense Finance and Accounting Service, Denver Center (DFAS-
JECC/DE) recommends the requested relief be denied. DFAS-JECC/DE
states the applicant was discharged under the SPD of “JFX,” one half
separation pay authorized; however, the applicant does not meet the
criteria to receive separation pay due to the fact that she did not
serve the minimum six years of active duty service.
The complete DFAS-JECC/DE evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR STAFF EVALUATION:
The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states she should
have had a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) prior to being discharged.
Her physical profile serial report, dated 30 Apr 06, states “If
profile is renewed 3 months past 16 May 06, an MEB will be required,
Per Col. D. O.” She was hospitalized on 15 May 06, which put her back
on a profile; therefore, requiring her to have an MEB. Her chain of
command preceded with the administrative discharge before anyone would
realize she needed an MEB. All her profiles afterwards were done for
her separation in order to say “no” to MEB required.
Her husband was in Turkey for 18 months and she was under a lot of
stress. She further states there is no excuse for her actions but her
chain of command made it difficult for her to reach out for help. Her
complete response is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends the requested relief be
denied. The applicant is requesting separation pay due to being
discharged for a personality disorder. The Medical Consultant states
in accordance with the Department of Defense Instruction, personality
disorders are not considered eligible for disability determination or
compensation. The applicant had a medical condition that was
considered unsuitable rather than unfitting for military service.
A complete copy of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at
Exhibit F.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 14 Nov 07, a copy of the additional Air Force evaluation was
forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. As
of this date, no response has been received by this office.
_________________________________________________________________
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 an error or an injustice. We took notice of the
applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case;
however, we agree with the opinion and the recommendation of the Air
Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as
the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has failed to sustain
her burden of proof that she has been the victim of either 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2007-01144 in Executive Session on 18 Dec 07, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Michael J. Novel, Panel Chair
Mr. Anthony P. Reardon, Member
Ms. Marcia Jane Bachman, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number
BC-2007-01144 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 6 Apr 07, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, DFAS-JECC/DE, dated 1 May 07.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 May 07.
Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 11 Jun 07.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 3 Oct 07.
Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 9 Nov 07
Exhibit G. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 16 Nov 07.
MICHAEL J. NOVEL
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03182
DFAS-JECC/DE states the applicant reenlisted on 3 Nov 03, entitling him to the SRB which was established in the amount of $60,000.00. 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 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. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 28...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02073
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02073 INDEX CODE: 110.03 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 13 Jan 08 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Extended Active Duty (EAD) date be changed from 25 Oct 05 to 11 Aug 05 to prevent a break in service, restore her promotion line number, and clear a debt for back pay and...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02847
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02847 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her narrative reason for discharge and her reentry code (RE) be changed to allow her to enter the Air National Guard (ANG). _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2001-00295
The applicant’s rebuttal, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, General Law Division, HQ USAF/JAG, noted that Section 2005 provides for recoupment if a member fails to complete the ADSC voluntarily or due to misconduct. On 14 Aug 01, DFAS-POCC/DE advised the applicant that, based on her placement on the TDRL, it was inappropriate at this time to recoup monies which might not be owed if...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02638
________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant entered the Air Force on 10 Jun 98 and served on active duty until her Honorable Discharge on 9 Oct 06. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2003-03852A
There was no evidence in the servicemember’s records to indicate that either the servicemember or the applicant submitted an election to change the SBP coverage from spouse to former spouse. Counsel's complete response is at Exhibit L. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: DFAS-CL/DGM states the applicant relies on the Holt and King cases to support her request for award of an SBP annuity. The King case is also of little impact...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03297
In support of her request, the applicant provided a Mental Health Evaluation, dated 28 Jun 06, from the Life Skills Support Center, 90 MDOS/SGOH, F.E. Warren AFB, WY, recommending a waiver for reenlistment because her adjustment disorder had resolved and “there was no evidence of a mental health condition or a personality disorder at this time.” The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. As personality disorders are frequently exacerbated by stress, they may...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-00615
______________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the applicant’s request for award of the AFCM be denied. The complete AFPC/DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C. The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends the applicant’s records be changed to reflect she received a medical retirement with a 30 or 50 percent disability rating. The complete AFPC/DPSD complete evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-00319
The complete BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. The SAF/MRB (Legal Advisor) states the applicant was administratively discharged for a personality disorder. If (and only if) the applicant has established she should have been found unfit for duty, then the case should have been dual processed, and there then appears to be an error upon which to consider basing a record correction. The complete BCMR Medical Consultant's addendum is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-01557
The complete AFRC/SGP evaluation is at Exhibit C. The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends the record be changed to reflect the applicant was placed on active duty orders effective 1 Nov 09 and remained so until placed on the TDRL with an 80 percent disability rating effective 24 Jun 10. The complete AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states that...