Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9703148
Original file (9703148.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

JUL  0 7  

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NUMBER:  97-03148 

COUNSEL:  NONE 

HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
Her general discharge be upgraded to honorable so that she will 
be eligible to pursue her education under the Montgomery GI Bill. 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
The discharge characterization is not in error, but she fails to 
see why her weight, at the time of discharge, should prevent her 
from obtaining any further education. 
No supporting documentation submitted with applicant's  appeal at 
Exhibit A .  

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from 
the  applicant's  military  records,  are  contained  in  the  Brief 
prepared  by  the  Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Board  (AFDRB). 
Accordingly,  there  is  no  need  to  recite  these  facts  in  this 
Record of Proceedings. 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

The Air  Force Discharge Review Board  (AFDRB) denied applicant's 
request  on  16  September  1997. 
The  AFDRB  indicated  that  the 
discharge  was  not  only  for  weight,  but  also  for  minor 
disciplinary infractions.  Had weight  been  the only reason for 
the  discharge, the AFDRB  may  well  have  upgraded  the discharge. 
Given  the  multiple  acts  of  misconduct,  however,  the  AFDRB 
determined  the  general  discharge  was  the  appropriate 
characterization of  applicant's  service.  The  AFDRB  concluded 
that  the  discharge  was  consistent  with  the  procedural  and 
substantive  requirements  of  the  discharge  regulation  and  was 
within  the  discretion of  the  discharge  authority  and  that  the 

applicant  was  provided  full  administrative  due  process 
(Exhibit C) . 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
A  copy  of  the  decision  of  the  AFDRB  was  forwarded  to  the 
applicant on 2 2   October 1997 for review and response.  As of this 
,  date, no response has been received by this office  (Exhibit D). 

1 

- 

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.  Sufficient  relevant  evidence  has  been  presented  to 
demonstrate the existence of probable injustice.  After reviewing 
the circumstances of this case, we are of the opinion that, based 
on  clemency,  the  applicant's  discharge  should  be  upgraded  to 
honorable.  We noted the minor disciplinary infractions; however, 
ultimately her discharge was based  on her  status in the Weight 
Management  Program. 
In  view  of  the  minor  nature  of  the 
infractions the applicant committed and the stated reason for her 
separation, we believe it would be an injustice for her discharge 
to  be  a  disqualifying  factor  for  her  possible  entitlement  to 
Montgomery  GI  Bill  benefits.  We  therefore  recommend  that  the 
records be corrected as indicated below. 

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: 
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force 
relating to APPLICANT be  corrected to  show that, on 2  November 
1990, she  was  honorably  discharged  and  furnished  an  honorable 
discharge certificate. 

The following members of the Board considered this application in 
Executive Session on 31 March 1998, under the provisions of AFI 
3 6 - 2 6 0 3 :  

Mr. Benedict A. Kausal IV, Panel Chair 
Ms. Dorothy P. Loeb, Member 
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Member 

2 

97- 03148 

All  members  voted  to correct  the  records,  as  recommended.  The 
following documentary evidence was considered: 

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 28 April  1997. 
Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 
Exhibit C.  AFDRB Brief. 
Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 22 Oct  97. 

&t.&&i- 
BENEDICT A. KAUSAL IV 
Panel Chair 

3 

97- 03148 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

WASHINGTON, DC 

JUL  0 7  5998 

Office of the Assistant Secretary 

AFBCMR 97-03 148 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF 

Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for 

Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States 
Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that: 

discharged and furnished an honorable discharge certificate. 

records of the Department of the Air Force relating to 
e corrected to show that, on 2 November 1990, she w 

Air Force RevieMoards Agency 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1997-02986

    Original file (BC-1997-02986.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 19 May 97, applicant was advised of her commander’s intent to impose nonjudicial punishment upon her under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for her alleged misconduct in violation of Article 134 for the following offense: at or near McGuire AFB, on or about 29 Apr 97, being disorderly in that she engaged in a verbal tirade and threw a handful of dental instruments out a doorway. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9702986

    Original file (9702986.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 19 May 97, applicant was advised of her commander’s intent to impose nonjudicial punishment upon her under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for her alleged misconduct in violation of Article 134 for the following offense: at or near McGuire AFB, on or about 29 Apr 97, being disorderly in that she engaged in a verbal tirade and threw a handful of dental instruments out a doorway. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-00882

    Original file (BC-2002-00882.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-00882 INDEX CODE: 126.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Article 15 be set aside so that her discharge can be upgraded so that she may qualify for Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) benefits. The service member may then consult with a defense counsel to determine whether to accept nonjudicial...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9302848A

    Original file (9302848A.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 93-02848 INDEX CODES: 111.01, 131.00 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Officer Effectiveness Reports (OERs) for the periods closing 16 Jul 83 and 16 Jul 85 be declared void and removed from her records. In addition to the aforementioned requests, she is also requesting that she be...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1993-02848A

    Original file (BC-1993-02848A.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 93-02848 INDEX CODES: 111.01, 131.00 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Officer Effectiveness Reports (OERs) for the periods closing 16 Jul 83 and 16 Jul 85 be declared void and removed from her records. In addition to the aforementioned requests, she is also requesting that she be...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9703390

    Original file (9703390.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 97-03390 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: STEPHEN J. DUNN HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ RESUME OF CASE On 21 April 1998, the Board considered and denied applicant's 11 July 1997 application requesting that (1) her uncharacterized discharge be changed to a medical discharge; (2) a referral to a Physical Evaluation Board...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1997-03390

    Original file (BC-1997-03390.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 97-03390 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: STEPHEN J. DUNN HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ RESUME OF CASE On 21 April 1998, the Board considered and denied applicant's 11 July 1997 application requesting that (1) her uncharacterized discharge be changed to a medical discharge; (2) a referral to a Physical Evaluation Board...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9703575

    Original file (9703575.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant’s request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Contrary to what the applicant states in her request, the "2Q" code was not assigned simply to prevent her immediate reenlistment, but rather to reflect the fact that she was separated with an unfitting medical condition under provisions of AFR 35-4 and the disability evaluation sys- tem. Page 2 AFBCMR Case #...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802727

    Original file (9802727.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant's request for upgrade of her discharge (Exhibit C). The AFDRB Brief was forwarded to the applicant f o r review and response (Exhibit D). The decision of the AFDRB appears to be based on the evidence of record and has not been rebutted by applicant.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9801004

    Original file (9801004.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Upon his discharge in 1969, his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) indicated that, in addition to the then current four years “net service this period” he was given creditable service “other service” of 1 year, 2 months, and 3 days. He has lived his adult life with the thought that his undesirable time was deemed creditable as a result of his original appeal to the AFDRB and serving honorably the additional 4 years. Insufficient relevant...