ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-1996-02127
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded
to honorable.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He requests his application for upgrade of his discharge be
reconsidered as the upgrade is long overdue. He also received
Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) disability three years ago.
The DVA says he has mental issues and that is another strike
against him.
His discharge date is incorrect and it has caused him not to be
hired for certain government jobs. He needs the discharge to be
upgraded so he can have a better chance on getting a better job.
It has been over 30 years and it has prevented him from
obtaining a DOD civilian job on Fort Bliss, TX.
The applicants complete submission, with attachment, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 30 Apr 81, the applicant entered active duty.
On 13 Nov 84, the applicant was notified by his commander he was
recommending he be discharged In Accordance With (IAW) AFR 39-
10, Administrative Separation of Airmen, paragraph 5-47b. The
specific reasons for the recommendation include two Article
15s, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for Absent
Without Leave (AWOL), failure to meet dress and personal
appearance standards, delinquent club account, a Letter of
Reprimand (LOR) for arrest by the Clovis Police Department for
Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) and a LOR for writing a bad
check to the base exchange.
According to an undated letter, the staff judge advocate
determined the discharge recommendation legally sufficient.
On 13 Dec 84, the discharge authority approved the
recommendation for discharge.
On 14 Dec 84, he received a general (under honorable conditions)
discharge with narrative reason for separation of Misconduct
pattern of conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline.
On 20 Jul 96, the Board considered and denied a similar appeal.
For an accounting of the facts surrounding his previous request
and the rationale of the Board's earlier decision, see the
Record of Proceedings at Exhibit B.
On 14 Apr 15, SAF/MRBR provided the applicant with an
opportunity to submit information pertaining to his activities
since leaving the service (Exhibit C). 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. In an earlier finding, the Board determined there was
insufficient evidence to warrant any corrective action. After
thoroughly reviewing the additional documentation submitted in
support of his appeal and the evidence of record, we do not
believe the applicant has overcome the rationale expressed in
our previous decision. In the interest of justice, we
considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however,
there was no evidence submitted to compel us to recommend
granting the relief sought on that basis. Therefore, in the
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to
recommend granting the relief sought.
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 members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-1996-02127 in Executive Session on 10 Jun 15 under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 13 Aug 14, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 30 Aug 96, w/atchs.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Apr 15.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03658
The applicant’s performance reports are provided at Exhibit B. Available records pertaining to the applicant’s medical issues are at Exhibit B, and the AFBCMR Medical Consultant provides medical details in his advisory at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s review of the applicant’s service records revealed no reference to participation in combat or events similar to those described by the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02127
The applicant presented materials for consideration and made a personal appearance; however, on 5 Jan 01 the XX AW commander strongly recommended to the 22nd Air Force (22 AF) commander that the applicant be removed from the promotion list. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. HQ AFRC/DPM advises that the Article 15 was never placed in the applicant’s record. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03392
The reasons for these actions are as follows: On 14 Feb 96, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for failure to obey a lawful general regulation to comply with the dress and personal appearance standards. On 3 Jan 96, the applicant received a LOR for making a false official statement that he had a medical appointment when he did not. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation...
After notification, the applicant provided a statement explaining his problems with the AMWAY solicitation and his weight. The Chief recommended applicant’s retirement as a 1LT. AC-XXXXXX, dated 29 Jan 96, directed that, effective 29 Feb 96, the applicant would be relieved from active duty and retired effective 1 Mar 96 in the grade of captain.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-1984-04083A
On 13 Oct 83, his commander recommended discharge. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant contends, as a diabetic herself, that her husband’s elevated blood sugar episode was not properly followed up by the Air Force. Review of service and DVA medical records through 1992 show no evidence of diabetes, and evaluation by DVA physicians also indicate no...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-1991-02293A
On 13 Oct 83, his commander recommended discharge. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant contends, as a diabetic herself, that her husband’s elevated blood sugar episode was not properly followed up by the Air Force. Review of service and DVA medical records through 1992 show no evidence of diabetes, and evaluation by DVA physicians also indicate no...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01991
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01991 INDEX CODE: 106.00, 100.05 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 24 Dec 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214 reflect an Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) of 81150 rather than 81130, and his 1985 discharge be upgraded from general to honorable. According to his Enlisted...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-01312 INDEX CODE: 111.01, 131 COUNSEL: FRED L. BAUER HEARING DESIRED: Yes APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Officer Performance Report (OPR) rendered for the period 20 Apr 96 through 19 Apr 97 be declared void and removed from his records and his corrected record be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-01666
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-01666 INDEX CODE: 108.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect he was retired by reason of a physical disability because of a post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and hallucinations. In the Medical Consultant’s view, there was no error or injustice in the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02080
At the time of his separation, his hearing loss in the right ear did not constitute a medical condition that warranted referral into the Disability Evaluation system. The Medical Consultant 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 9 Jan 04 for review and comment within 30 days. ...