Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9801985
Original file (9801985.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

IN THE MATTER 0-F: 

DOCKET NUMBER:  98-01985 

COUNSEL:  NONE 

HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

Applicant  requests  that  his  general  discharge  be  upgraded  to 
honorable.  Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A. 

The  appropriate  Air  Force  office  evaluated  applicant's  request 
and  provided  an  advisory  opinion  to  the  Board  recommending the 
application  be  denied  (Exhibit C).  The  advisory  opinion  was 
forwarded to the applicant for review and  response  (Exhibit D). 
As of this date, no response has been received by this office. 

After  careful  consideration  of  applicant's  request  and  the 
available  evidence  of  record, we  find  insufficient  evidence  of 
error or  injustice to warrant corrective action.  The  facts and 
opinions stated in the advisory opinion appear to be based on the 
evidence  of  record  and  have  not  been  rebutted  by  applicant@. 
Absent  persuasive  evidence applicant was  denied  rights to which 
entitled,  appropriate  regulations  were  not  followed,  or 
appropriate  standards  were  not  applied,  we  find  no  basis  to 
disturb the existing record. 

Accordingly, applicant's request is denied. 

The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision. 
Applicant should also be informed that this decision is final and 
will  only be  reconsidered upon  the presentation of new  relevant 
evidence  which  was  not  reasonably  available  at  the  time  the 
application was filed. 

Members  of  the  Board  Mr.  Vaughn  E.  Schlunz,  Mr.  Edward  C. 
Koenig, 11,  and  Mr.  Kenneth  L.  Reinertson,  considered  this 
application  on  17  December  1998,  in  accordance  with  the 
provisions  of  Air  Force  Instruction 36-2603,  and  the  governing 
statute, 10, U.S.C. 1552. 

'VAUGAN  E. SCHLUNZ 
Panel Chair 

Exhibits: 

A.  Applicant's  DD Form 149 
B.  Available Master Personnel Records 
C.  Advisory Opinion (s) 
D.  AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion(s) 

D E P A R T M E N T  O F  THE A I R   F O R C E  

H E A D Q U A R T E R S  AIR  FORCE P E R S O N N E L  C E N T E R  

R A N D O L P H   AIR  FORCE B A S E  TEXAS 

AUG  2 6  1998 

MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR 

FROM:  HQ AFPCDPPRS 

550 C Street West Ste 11 
Randolph AFB TX  78 150-47 13 

SUBJECT:  Application for Correction of Military Recor 

The applicant, while serving in the grade of airman first class, was discharged from the Air 

Force 16 Feb 83 under the provisions of AFM 39-10 (Msconduct-Pattern of Minor Disciplinary 
Infiactions) with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge.  He served 01 year 06 
months and  14 days total active service. 

Reauested Action.  Applicant is requesting an upgrade of his discharge to honorable. 

Basis for Request.  Applicant claims it is doing him more harm than good to have been 

discharge with a general discharge when seeking employment.  He does not claim an injustice in 
his discharge, he only appeals for an upgrade to honorable because he states he cannot lie about 
his military service in applications for employment. 

, 

Facts.  On  16 Feb 83, applicant was notified by his commander that involuntary discharge 
action had been initiated against him for his minor disciplinary infi-actions. The commander 
indicated applicant had been given a Letter of Reprimand for attempting to alter or change the 
results of a commander directed urinalysis, he was counseled on a SAC Form 845 for failure to 
go, counseled on a a SAC Form 845 for insufficient fbnds check, counseled the third time on a 
15AF Form 182 for financial irresponsibility and finally, on 08 Dec 82, he was given a commande& 
directed urinalysis.  Test results indicated a positive for cocaine.  Military counsel was appointed 
to assist the applicant and he refbsed to submit statements in his own behalf.  Applicant did 
cooperate with the OS1 in their investigation and in addition, he received death threats for his 
cooperation with the OSI.  The case was reviewed by the base legal office and was found to be 
legally sufficient to support discharge.  The discharge authority approved the recommendation for 
discharge on 16 Feb 83 and directed that the applicant be hrnished a general discharge certificate 
without probation and rehabilitation. 

Discussion.  This case has beeh reviewed for separation processing and there are no errors or 

irregularities causing an injustice to the applicant.  The discharge complies with directives in effect 
at the time of his discharge.  The records indicate member’s military service was reviewed and 
appropriate action was taken. 

Recommendation.  Applicant did not identi@ any specific errors in the discharge processing nor 

provide facts which warrant an upgrade of the discharge he received.  Accordingly, we 
recommend applicant’s request be denied.  He has not filed a timely request. 

JOHN C. WOOTEN, DAF 
Military Personnel Mgmt Spec 
Separations Branch 
Dir of Personnel Program Management 

. 
*

.

 

I -  



Similar Decisions

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00263

    Original file (FD2003-00263.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    YAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD TYPE I PERSONAL APPEARANCE * I C I x RECORD REVIEW MEMBER SITTING ISSUES I I INDEX NllMRFR HEARING DATE 19 Aug 2003 CASE NUMBER Case heard at Washington, D.C. 1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD 2 APPLICATlON FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE LETTER OF NOTIFICATION PERSONNEL FILE I COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD I ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF I PERSONAL APPEARANCE I TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9801432

    Original file (9801432.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 98-01432 COUNSEL : HEARING DESIRED: YES JAN 13m ' Applicant requests that he be awarded the Armed Forces Medal (AFEM) , or other appropriate expeditionary Expeditionary medal, for his service in direct support of operations in Grenada between 23 October 1983 and 21 November 1983. The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board...

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00179

    Original file (FD2003-00179.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant statement to the Air Force Discharge Review Board. The one thing that makes life easier to deal with is my relationship with God. I f you are discharged, you w i l 4.

  • AF | DRB | CY2001 | FD01-00080

    Original file (FD01-00080.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I was told it was because of the reason for separation on my military discharge. T h i s f a c t i s e v i d e n t i n t h e Records o f Counseling g i v e n t o t h e respondent and t h e subsequent p s y c h i a t r i c e v a l u a t i o n , d a t e d 30 A p r i l 1987.The r e t e n t i o n of t h i s respondent would b e i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e maintenance of good o r d e r and d i s c i p l i n e . The respondent should b e discharged and h i s d i s c h a r g e should be...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9801660

    Original file (9801660.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). He has not filed a timely request.

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | FD2006-00009

    Original file (FD2006-00009.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    , - - - - - - - - - - - ISSUES A92.21 A92.19 A02.19 A02.25 A93.21 I 11 Mav 2006 I I INDEXNUMBER A60.00 1 I ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD 2 ( APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 1 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE I TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE 5 CASE NUMBER FD-2006-00009 I I APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND T m BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE...

  • AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0038

    Original file (FD2002-0038.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE CASE NUMBER FD20024038 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable. Attachment: Examiner’s Brief DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD (Former AB) (HGH SRA) FD2002-0038 1. (Change Discharge to Honorable) ISSUES ATTACHED TO BRIEF.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9800246

    Original file (9800246.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Have added an additional entry o f 'I23 Apr 83 - Unit Weapon Systems Officer RF-4Co1l A copy of the complete Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C. The Chief, Appeals & SSB Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPA, also evaluated this appeal and disagrees with the applicant's contention that the selection board may have thought he was not concerned about his promotion because of the Board Discrepancy Report in his selection folder. 3 98-00246 A copy of the complete Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9800696

    Original file (9800696.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    - The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant/counsel for review and response (Exhibit D). The facts and opinions stated in the advisory opinion appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant or counsel.

  • AF | DRB | CY2001 | FD01-00030

    Original file (FD01-00030.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Recommend t h a t respondent be separated with an honorable discharge, w i t h or without an o f f e r of P & R; or c. Direct t h e respondent be separated with a g e n e r a l discharge, w i t h or without an o f f e r of P & R. 6. The authority for this action is AFR 39-10, para exceeding weight standards. Copies of the documents to be forwarded t o the separation authority in support of this recommendation are attached.