Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00771
Original file (BC-2011-00771.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00771 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

Her narrative reason for separation be corrected. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

Her previous DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge 
from Active Duty was re-accomplished because an erroneous 
separation code was entered on it. However, she believes the 
narrative reason for separation needs to be corrected, as well. 

 

In support of her request, the applicant provides a copy of her 
corrected DD Form 214 and a letter from her former supervisor. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 15 February 1994, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air 
Force. 

 

On 29 August 1996, the applicant was notified of her commander’s 
intent to recommend that she be discharged from the Air Force 
under the provisions of AFPD 36-32, Air Force Military Training 
and AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, paragraph 
5.52, Commission of a Serious Offense. The applicant 
acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge, right to 
seek counsel and submit a statement on her own behalf. 

 

The specific reasons for this action were: 1) On 10 June 1996, 
the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial for two 
violations of Article 123a, Uniform Code of Military Justice 
(UCMJ); for writing checks without sufficient funds; one 
violation of Article 134, UCMJ; for failure to pay a just debt 
and one violation of Article 107, UCMJ; for making a false 
official statement. She was sentenced to confinement for three 
months, forfeiture of $300 per month for six months, and reduced 
in grade to airman basic. 

 

On 7 October 1996, Staff Judge Advocate found the case to be 
legally sufficient and recommended the applicant be discharged 


with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge, without 
probation and rehabilitation. The discharge authority approved 
the applicant’s discharge. On 15 October 1996, the applicant 
was discharged from the Air Force with a general (under 
honorable conditions) discharge in the grade of airman basic. 
She was credited with 2 years, 5 months and 16 days of total 
active service. 

 

On 21 November 1996, the applicant was erroneously issued a DD 
Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, 
reflecting a separation code as “JKL”, which denotes Misconduct 
(Sexual Perversion). However, the Air Force Personnel Center 
corrected the error and reissued the applicant’s DD Form 214 
showing her separation code as “JKQ”, which denotes Misconduct 
(Serious Offense). 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of 
the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit C. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

HQ AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. DPSOS addressed the reason for 
the applicant’s discharge from the Air Force. DPSOS states the 
applicant’s narrative reason for separation (misconduct) was 
appropriate and the documentation on file in the master 
personnel records supports the basis for discharge. 

 

The applicant’s discharge was consistent with the procedural and 
substantive requirements of the discharge instruction and was 
within the discretion of the discharge authority. In addition, 
the applicant did not provide any facts warranting a change to 
her narrative reason for separation. 

 

The complete DPSOS 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 22 July 2011, for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit D). As of this date, this office has not received a 
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 regarding the 
applicant’s request for a change in her narrative reason for 
separation. We note that while the erroneous separation code 
originally assigned to the applicant had to be corrected, the 
narrative reason for separation of “misconduct” issued at the 
time of her separation accurately reflects the circumstances of 
her separation and should remain unchanged. Therefore, 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 the applicant has not been the victim of an error 
or injustice. In the absence of persuasive 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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2011-00771 in Executive Session on 23 August 2011, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 Panel Chair 

 Member 

 Member 

 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 November 2010, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPSOS, Letter, dated 26 May 2011. 

 Exhibit D. SAF/MRBR, Letter, dated 22 July 2011. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00435

    Original file (BC-2011-00435.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    She understands the mistakes she made as a teen and does not have time to mess up another opportunity to serve her country. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial of an upgrade to her discharge. We considered upgrading her RE and separation code based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03928

    Original file (BC-2010-03928.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03928 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reentry (RE) code of 4K, which denotes “medically disqualified or pending medical evaluation board (MEB) or physical evaluation board (PEB)” be changed to a RE code that will allow her to reenlist without a waiver. On 27 March 2002, the applicant...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00942

    Original file (BC-2011-00942.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, medical records and letters from his doctors. On 19 Nov 08, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend that he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFPD 36-32, Air Force Military Training and AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, paragraph 5.14. for Erroneous Enlistment. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-03624

    Original file (BC-2010-03624.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03624 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty, be corrected to reflect: 1. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSOS recommends the requested relief be denied. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02295

    Original file (BC 2013 02295.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 30 November 2011, she was notified of her commander’s intent to discharge her from the Air Force for erroneous enlistment. Had the Air Force known of this condition at the time of her enlistment, she would not have been allowed entry into the military. The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: She has reviewed her medical records and does not see where it states that she...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC2007-02179

    Original file (BC2007-02179.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    It appears the specific reasons for this action was that she had back problems prior to entry on active duty but failed to disclose these problems until she was in BMT. In addition, SGPS states if the findings of the Board are in favor with the applicant, they can support her request to change her RE Code from “Fraudulent Entry” to "Not Medically Qualified.” The complete SGPS evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPAE recommends denial. The applicant was discharged from the Air Force for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC 2011 01546

    Original file (BC 2011 01546.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01546 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. DPSOS notes had the Air Force known of the applicant’s condition at the time of her enlistment, she would have been denied entry in military service. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01705

    Original file (BC-2011-01705.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reiterates her claim that her medical diagnosis does not reflect a Personality Disorder because Axis II shows “None.” In support of her response, the applicant submits documentation already included in her original submission. We believe it would be in the interest of equity and justice and in keeping with...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01441

    Original file (BC-2010-01441.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01441 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her uncharacterized entry level separation, separation code of “JFW” which denotes failed medical/physical procurement standards, and reentry (RE) code of 4C (separated for concealment of juvenile records, minority, failure to meet physical standards for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01606

    Original file (BC-2011-01606.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01606 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial of the applicant’s request to change his RE code and narrative reason for separation. After reviewing the evidence of record,...