Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05671
Original file (BC 2013 05671.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-05671
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, item 26, Separation Code, be amended to reflect MCC 
(Reduction in Force) rather than MGQ (Intradepartmental 
Transfer).


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was separated due to Force Shaping/Reduction-in-Force (RIF) 
which gave him the option to transfer to the Air Force Reserve, 
hence the intradepartmental transfer that resulted.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Air Force Reserve on 3 July 2004.

The applicant was released from active duty on 3 February 
2006 and transferred to the Air Force Reserve.  He served 
1 year, 7 months and 1 day on active duty.  He received a 
separation code of MGQ (Intradepartmental Transfer).


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/DPAA recommends denial.  DPAA states the memorandum, signed 
by USAF Chief of Staff (attached), is dated four months after 
the applicant separated from active duty and does not state that 
PBD720 has been implemented.  Upon review of the applicant’s 
record, AF 475, Education/Training Report, dated 29 November 
2006, states that he was eliminated from Joint Primary Pilot 
Training (JPPT).  Additionally, comments in the Air Force 
Recruiting Information Support System-Reserve (AFRISS-R) entered 
by the applicant’s AF Reserve recruiter on 28 November 
2005 reiterate that he was eliminated from JPPT and state that 
he “opted to go into the AF Reserve”.

If the Board agrees with their recommendation, no further 
administrative action is necessary and the applicant’s record 
reflects correctly.  However, if the decision is to grant the 
relief sought, the following actions should be taken:

    a. Change block 26 of his DD 214 to reflect “MCC.”

    b. Change block 28 to reflect “Reduction in Force.”

    c. AFPC Separations should consider whether the applicant is 
authorized additional entitlements if his separation will be re-
classified as Reduction in Force.

The complete ARPC/DPAA evaluation, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit B.

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial.  DPSOR states the applicant was 
eliminated from T-6 Joint Primary Pilot Training (JPPT) for 
airsickness and anxiety leading to Manifestation of 
Apprehension.

The applicant applied for release from active duty so that he 
could go Palace Front to the Air Force Reserve.  

The applicant submitted his documentation to his Reserve 
recruiter for processing of his transfer to the Air Force 
Reserve.

The separations authority approved the applicant's release from 
active duty and directed an honorable discharge and transfer to 
the Air Force Reserve.  Documentation provided by HQ ARPC/DPAA 
shows that the applicant went to a recruiter and stated his 
desire to enter the Air Force Reserve after being eliminated 
from JPPT for airsickness and anxiety.  Once the applicant found 
a reserve position and submitted his documents to his reserve 
recruiter, he was processed for release from active duty.  
Therefore, the applicant's SPD code and narrative reason for 
separation for “intradepartmental transfer” are correct as 
listed on the DD Form 214.  

The applicant contends that he was affected by PBD 720/Force 
Shaping, however, a signed memorandum, from the Chief of Staff, 
Air Force (CSAF), dated 7 June 2006, which discussed possible 
implementation of this initiative is dated four months after the 
applicant's effective date of separation.  It is our contention 
that the applicant was not affected by the initiative and 
separated under a regular PALACE FRONT program.  The applicant's 
separation to include the SPD code, narrative reason for 
separation, and character of service was processed in accordance 
with the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of 
the discharge authority.  The applicant did not provide any 
evidence of an error or injustice regarding his SPD code or 
narrative reason for separation.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 20 October 2014, copies of the Air Force evaluations were 
forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 
30 days (Exhibit D).  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 injustice.  After a 
thorough review of the evidence of record, it is our opinion 
that given the circumstances surrounding his separation from the 
Air Force, the narrative reason for separation and corresponding 
SPD code assigned were proper and in compliance with the 
appropriate instructions.  In addition, the applicant has not 
provided any evidence which would lead us to believe otherwise.  
Therefore, we agree with 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.  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 the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2013-05671 in Executive Session on 4 December 2014, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

  Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 December 2013, w/atchs.
  Exhibit B.  Letter, ARPC/DPAA, dated 5 February 2014, w/atchs.
  Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 15 September 2014.
  Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 October 2014.


Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00011

    Original file (BC-2010-00011.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00011 INDEX CODE: 110.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The separation code (SPD) of MGQ (Intradepartmental Transfer) on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty be changed to allow him to receive medical benefits. Those members separated under...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00416

    Original file (BC-2008-00416.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial as the SPD of “MGQ” is appropriate for those service members who have not completed the required Military Service Obligation of eight years. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05658

    Original file (BC 2013 05658.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05658 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be corrected as follows: a. Should the Board direct other corrections to the applicant’s DD Form 214, it would then be appropriate to administratively correct the address listed in item 19a. Therefore, we recommend the applicant's records be...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00790

    Original file (BC-2005-00790.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He requested a PALACE CHASE transfer from active duty approximately 9 August 2004 and enlisted in the National Guard on 5 January 2005 as outlined in the Force Shaping guidelines. Even though the evidence does not establish that the actions taken by Air Force officials were improper at the time of the applicant’s PALACE CHASE application, we find it difficult to believe the applicant would not have...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02883

    Original file (BC 2014 02883.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    AFI 36-3207, Separating Commissioned Officers, states the Air Force normally requires recoupment of a portion of education assistance, special pay, or bonus money received when officers separate before completing the period of active duty they agreed to serve. Further, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (OUSD) Memorandum, dated 29 Nov 10, directs members with an SPD Code of FGQ (Intradepartmental Transfer) are required to repay the unearned portion of the bonus. THE BOARD...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01871

    Original file (BC-2005-01871.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    In support of his request, the applicant submits a copy a personal statement, copies of AF Forms 1288 (Application for Ready Reserve Assignment) and a 29 June 2004 letter requesting a date of separation under PALACE CHASE. DPPRSR states the applicant’s AF Form 1288, dated 30 March 2004, is dated after the Force Shaping Phase I program ended. JAMES W. RUSSELL III Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2005-01871 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01788

    Original file (BC-2003-01788.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    His application was processed and approved with a date of separation of 30 October 2002 and a PALACE CHASE contract expiration date of 10 March 2007. The AFPC/DPPRSP 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 1 August 2003 for review and comment (Exhibits D). ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02861

    Original file (BC-2005-02861.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Separation Code he received is, in fact, the code authorized for the type of early separation he requested. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02399

    Original file (BC-2012-02399.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant separated under the provisions of PALACE CHASE on 1 January 2012 with a separation program designator of KGQ – PALACE CHASE. The applicant separated from active duty via the PALACE CHASE program and the only SPD code for members separating after fulfilling their military service obligation is KGQ. The applicant separated from active duty with a debt of $2,468.98 due to an unearned portion of a bonus.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02157

    Original file (BC 2014 02157.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    According to AFI 36-3205, Applying for the Palace Chase and Palace Front Programs, a member’s date of enlistment is the day after their date of separation from the Air Force. Once the board has completed its processing of this application, DPSOR will correct Item 9, Command to Which Transferred, from USAFR to ANG, State of Ohio, since the applicant enlisted in the ANG the next day. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 October 2014.