ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NUMBER: 96-00745
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His under other than honorable conditions discharge (UOTHC) be
upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The majority of the charges brought against him were due to his
disease called addiction. This was duly noted in his medical
file; that is, he was abusing the pain medications which were
prescribed to him, as well as codeine-based cough medicine. In
retrospect, he is aware that drug awareness was less than it is
today. Toward that end, he feels strongly that his past negative
behaviors, which were the direct result of his addiction, should
not be held against him. Fortunately, today he is aware of his
disease and has taken responsibility for his life-he has been
clean for seven years.
A letter, dated 2 Jun 98, submitted in the applicant's behalf, is
at Exhibit D.
The applicant's complete submission, provided through his
congressman's office, is at Exhibit E.
RESUME OF THE CASE:
On 26 Aug 97, the Board considered and denied an application for
correction of military records pertaining to the applicant, in
which he requested that his UOTHC discharge be upgraded to
honorable (see AFBCMR 96-00745, with Exhibits A through C).
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
In earlier findings, we determined that there was insufficient
evidence to warrant any corrective action regarding the
applicant's request for upgrade of his UOTHC discharge. We have
reviewed the applicant's most recent submissions and find the
evidence provided insufficient to warrant a reversal of our
previous determination in this case. The applicant again has not
provided any evidence that the discharge action was improper or
contrary to the prevailing regulation. We note the post-service
documentation provided by the applicant in support of his appeal
and his efforts since his discharge are commendable. However, we
are not persuaded that the documentation is sufficient at this
time to override the numerous incidents of misconduct which,
ultimately, resulted in the applicant's discharge. Accordingly,
we find no basis to act favorably on his request for upgrade of
his UOTHC discharge.
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of probable 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 evidence not
considered with this application.
The following members of the Board considered this aDDlication in
Executive Session on 6 Oct 98, under the provisio;, of AFI 36-
2603:
Ms. Cathlynn Sparks, Panel Chair
Mr. Vaughn E. Schlunz, Member
Mr. Gregory H. Petkoff, Member
The following additional documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit D. Letter, in applicant's behalf, dated 12 Jan 98.
Exhibit E. Letter from Congressman, dated 2 Jun 98,
w/atchs.
CATHLYNN SPARKS
Panel Chair
2
AFBCMR 96-00745
AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 9600745A3
_________________________________________________________________ RESUME OF THE CASE: On 26 Aug 97, the Board considered and denied an application for correction of military records pertaining to the applicant, in which he requested that his UOTHC discharge be upgraded to honorable. Accordingly, a majority of the Board recommends that the applicant’s UOTHC discharge be upgraded to honorable. The following additional documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit G. Record of Proceedings,...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-01606
On 5 Apr 89, the applicant was notified by the commander that he was recommending the applicant be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10, paragraph 5-50.1, for drug abuse with service characterized as general. On 6 Jul 90, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge to honorable. Therefore, the Board recommends his discharge be upgraded to honorable and a majority of the Board recommends his RE...
On 5 Apr 89, the applicant was notified by the commander that he was recommending the applicant be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10, paragraph 5-50.1, for drug abuse with service characterized as general. On 6 Jul 90, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge to honorable. Therefore, the Board recommends his discharge be upgraded to honorable and a majority of the Board recommends his RE...
Regardless, at best, this would be an administrative error and not justification for voiding the report.” While the applicant contends that he was not given feedback during the contested reporting period, only members in the rating chain can confirm if counseling was provided. DPPPAB disagrees and states that AFR 39- 62 (paragraph 2-25) defines a referral report as an EPR with a rating in the far left block of any performance factor in Section III (Evaluation of Performance) and a rating of...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-03263 (Case 3) INDEX CODE: 128.10 COUNSEL: DAVID E. WHEELER HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His back pay and allowances in the amount of $9,326.65 be restored. It is JA’s opinion that the Board has sweeping authority to correct errors by granting waivers to policy; however, the Board is bound by statute -...
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to Board’s request, HQ AFRC/DPM, again reviewed this application recommended denial. The applicant’s Military Personnel Flight has been contacted and they indicated that he completed his 5-skill level in Apr 97 and has recently completed his PME requirements in Jul 98.
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1996-03766
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to Board’s request, HQ AFRC/DPM, again reviewed this application recommended denial. The applicant’s Military Personnel Flight has been contacted and they indicated that he completed his 5-skill level in Apr 97 and has recently completed his PME requirements in Jul 98.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00561
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00561 INDEX CODE: 112.05 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 20 Aug 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect he has 21 years, 7 months, and 8 days of total active service, rather than 19 years and 20 days. He enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 30 Jun 58 for a...
On 24 Mar 98, the applicant voluntarily requested early separation from the Air Force to be effective 17 Apr 98 by submitting an AF Form 31 (Airman’s Request for Early Separation/Separation Based on Change in Service Obligation) to attend Wrightco Technologies Training Institute with a class start date of 27 Apr 98. His discharge complied with directives in effect at the time and the records indicate his military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken. After a thorough...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02890
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 23 Jul 97 and was assigned to Keesler AFB, MS. On 19 Mar 98, he was notified of his commander’s intention to recommend discharge for minor disciplinary infractions with a general characterization. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPAE asserts the applicant’s RE code of “2C” [sic] (Involuntarily separated with an honorable...