RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03403
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her name be changed on her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release
or Discharge from Active Duty, from Jane Frances Probst to Bella
Jane Marsilio.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She divorced in 2004 and reverted back to her maiden name, but
the name change was not applied to her DD Form 214. Numerous
attempts to obtain a replacement DD Form 214 have failed due to
the name change.
She provides her marriage certificate, birth certificate,
District of Columbia (DC) Air National Guard (ANG) honorable
service certificate and passport showing her name change in
support of her application.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 24 Sep 83, the applicant entered the Air National Guard of
the District of Columbia.
According to DD Form 4, Enlistment/Reenlistment Document Armed
Forces of the United States, dated 24 Sep 83, the applicants
name is recorded as Jane Frances Probst.
On 21 Sep 87, the applicant was honorably discharged under the
provisions of ANGR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen,
paragraph 5-4h, and transferred to the Air Force Reserves
according to NGB Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of
Service. She was credited with 3 years, 11 months and 28 days
of service.
On 15 May 15, the applicant was forwarded a copy of the SAF/MR
memorandum, dated 9 Mar 15, that was provided in order to comply
with 10 U.S.C. §1556. Specifically, the memorandum notes that
the DD Form 214 is a document primarily created for the benefit
of the veteran to establish entitlement to various government
programs or in seeking employment with organizations that grant
a veterans' preference. However, any such name change should be
limited only to the DD 214; any change to an applicant's other
records to reflect a post-service name change should rarely be
recommended, and only in the most unusual cases. The AFBCMR
should require proof that the applicant's name was legally
changed. A signed and authenticated court order should be
required. Further, the correction should be to the DD 214 and
for the limited purposes of mitigating an injustice caused by
use of the DD Form 214.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of
an error or an injustice. Air Force Instruction 36-2608,
Military Personnel Records System, Table A7.3, Note 5 states Do
not correct records of former members unless evidence proves the
name used while serving with the Air Force was erroneously
recorded. A review of the applicants records revealed that
she enlisted, served and was discharged under the name of Jane
Frances Probst. The applicant did not provide a copy of her
divorce decree, but indicates on the DD Form 149, the divorce
was in 2004. This indicates the applicants divorce took place
after her period of service. As the divorce took place after
the applicants period of service, it does not appear the Air
Force erroneously recorded the applicants name. Since the
applicant has no continuing affiliation with the Air Force as a
Reserve member or retiree, DPSIR is unable to amend her military
record after the fact.
The complete DPSIR 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 17 Feb 15 for review and comment 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 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 an error or injustice. We took
notice of the applicants complete submission, including birth
certificate, marriage certificate, discharge certificate and
Social Security Administration card, 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 conclusion the applicant has not
been the victim of an error of injustice. While we acknowledge
the applicants request to change her name because of her
divorce, we do not believe she has demonstrated evidence of an
injustice, as compared to others in her similar situation.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find
no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of material 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 documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2014-03403 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 Aug 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIR, dated 24 Sep 14.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Feb 15.AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01301
X In support of her request, the applicant provides copies of her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, and her 2009 and 2010 Form 1099R, Tax Statements. 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 conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-03676
The member’s widow is eligible to receive an SBP annuity of $412, but she has not submitted an application to date. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit B. Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. The widow of the service member indicated in a statement dated 25 Jan 06, that she recently completed and returned some forms sent to her by DFAS-CL.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03471
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03471 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The name on her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be changed as follows: Her first name be changed to add an a on the end; and, The middle name be deleted. The AFBCMR should require proof that the applicant's name was legally changed. In correcting an applicants DD Form 214, Air...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00558
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00558 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her records be amended to reflect her last name as Taylor versus Seed. The divorce decree the applicant provided does not meet the legal requirements to be used as a source document. ...
However, the law provides two mechanisms for changing spouse coverage to former spouse coverage, which must be exercised within the first year following divorce. If neither the member nor the former spouse requests the election change within the one-year eligibility period, former spouse coverage may not be established thereafter. The decedent and the applicant were married on 28 Dec 83; in Sep 85, the decedent notified the finance center of the change in his marital status and spouse...
The decedent and the applicant married on 4 Jun 79 and coverage and premiums were reinstated on the first anniversary of their marriage. As a result of the CG’s decision, the AFBCMR advised the applicant by letter dated 17 Sep 98 that, since the Board lacked the authority to approve claims that were filed more than six years after the death of the service member, her case was being returned and administratively closed (Exhibit D). Notwithstanding her on again/off again marriage to the...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02698
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIAR recommends the requested relief be denied. 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 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 an injustice. Exhibit D. Applicant’s...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02252
Further, since there was no court approved modification to the divorce decree regarding the SBP coverage, as required by statute, a majority of the Board is not persuaded the Air Force erred in refusing to change his SBP beneficiary after he advised DFAS that his former spouse had consented to the termination of her coverage based on the terms of their property settlement. _________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: The majority of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02185
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02185 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The name on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be changed. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00062
She indicates there is no evidence the deceased former member elected former spouse coverage for any of his former spouses. In Dec 92, DFAS received an SBP Open Enrollment Election form from the member requesting to change the applicants coverage from spouse to former spouse. A complete copy of the AFRBA Legal Advisor evaluation is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant contends...