Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9800510
Original file (9800510.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                                 ADDENDUM TO
                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00510
                                        110.00 100.06  106.00
                                        COUNSEL:  None

                                        HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

RESUME OF CASE:

In an application dated 17 February 1998, the applicant requested that
his reenlistment (RE) code of “2B” be changed  to  a  waiverable  code
such as “3A.” The applicant had been discharged in 1982 after 2 years,
1 month and  1  day  of  active  duty  for  “Unsuitability  -  Apathy,
Defective  Attitude.”  He  received  a  general  characterization   of
service.

On 25  August  1998,  the  Board  considered  and  denied  applicant's
request, concluding the applicant had supplied  insufficient  evidence
to warrant changing the code. The cover letter forwarding the  Board’s
decision advised the applicant that the type of discharge he  received
drove the RE code and suggested he  provide  post-service  information
for possible reconsideration.

Complete copies of the cover letter and the Record of Proceedings  are
attached at Exhibit F.

In letters dated  22  October  and  3  December  1998,  the  applicant
provided additional documentation and asked for an upgraded  discharge
with a corresponding RE code.

Applicant's complete reconsideration request is attached at Exhibit G.

Pursuant  to  the  AFBCMR  Staff’s  request,  the  Federal  Bureau  of
Investigation  (FBI)  indicated  that,  on  the  basis  of  the   data
furnished, they  were  unable  to  locate  an  arrest  record  on  the
applicant (Exhibit H).
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

After again reviewing the evidence of record, we find  no  impropriety
in the characterization of  the  applicant's  service.  The  discharge
appears  consistent  with  procedural  requirements  and  within   the
discharge authority’s discretion. Responsible officials appear to have
applied  appropriate  standards  in  effecting  the  separation.   The
applicant  has  not  provided  persuasive  evidence   that   pertinent
regulations were violated or that he was not afforded all  the  rights
to which entitled at the time  of  discharge.  We  find  no  error  or
injustice regarding his general discharge  and,  since  the  discharge
drove the applicant’s RE code, the “2B” he received is  valid.  It  is
true that this Board is not limited to  considering  only  the  events
which precipitated the discharge.  We  have  a  Congressional  mandate
which permits consideration of other  factors;  e.g.,  an  applicant's
background, overall quality of service,  and  post-service  activities
and accomplishments. Further, we may base our decision on  matters  of
equity  and  clemency  rather  than  simply  on  whether   rules   and
regulations which existed at the time were  followed.  However,  after
carefully considering the post-service documentation submitted by  the
applicant, we do not feel compelled to grant the requested  relief  on
the basis of clemency.  The additional documentation provided does not
overcome the fact that, according  to  the  evidence  of  record,  the
applicant’s  military  performance  and  behavior   were   good   when
conditions suited him but less  than  honorable  when  they  did  not.
Accordingly,  we  are  not  persuaded  that   corrective   action   is
appropriate.

_________________________________________________________________

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  application  in
Executive Session on 19 January 1999, under the provisions of AFI  36-
2603:

                  Mrs. Barbara A. Westgate, Panel Chair
                  Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Member
                  Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit F.  AFBCMR Letter dated 3 Sep 98, w/atchs.
   Exhibit G.  Applicant's Letters, dated 22 Oct & 3 Dec 98.
   Exhibit H.  FBI Response.




                                   BARBARA A. WESTGATE
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-00510

    Original file (BC-1998-00510.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Complete copies of the cover letter and the Record of Proceedings are attached at Exhibit F. In letters dated 22 October and 3 December 1998, the applicant provided additional documentation and asked for an upgraded discharge with a corresponding RE code. We find no error or injustice regarding his general discharge and, since the discharge drove the applicant’s RE code, the “2B” he received is valid. Exhibit H. FBI Response.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9800510

    Original file (9800510.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    It appears that the responsible officials applied appropriate standards in effecting the separation, and we do not find persuasive evidence that pertinent regulations were violated or that applicant was not afforded all the rights to which entitled at the time of discharge. Under our broader mandate and after careful consideration of all the facts and circumstances of applicant's case, the majority of the Board is persuaded the applicant has been a productive member of society. Applicant's...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9801124

    Original file (9801124.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In his 20 April 1998 appeal to the AFBCMR, the applicant requested his honorable discharge be changed to a medical disability discharge. Also provided was a statement from an individual who asserts he saw a drill instructor assault the applicant and “signed a police report on this matter in 1975 for the airforce police.” All of these letters, with their attachments, are at Exhibit I. A copy of the complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. The Chief, Physical Disability Division, HQ AFPC/DPPD,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-01124

    Original file (BC-1998-01124.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In his 20 April 1998 appeal to the AFBCMR, the applicant requested his honorable discharge be changed to a medical disability discharge. Also provided was a statement from an individual who asserts he saw a drill instructor assault the applicant and “signed a police report on this matter in 1975 for the airforce police.” All of these letters, with their attachments, are at Exhibit I. A copy of the complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. The Chief, Physical Disability Division, HQ AFPC/DPPD,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9900266

    Original file (9900266.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-00266 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge and his Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed. The applicant has not identified any specific errors in the discharge processing or provided...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9300955

    Original file (9300955.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A similar appeal was considered and denied by the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) on 4 October 1993 (Exhibit F) . The applicant provided additional new evidence pertaining to his post-service activities for possible reconsideration of his application (Exhibit G ) . 1552. r Exhibit F. Record of Proceedings, dated 4 Oct 93 Exhibit G. Letter from applicant, undated, with Exhibit H. FBI Investigative Report, PCN 980446910621 additional evidence Panel Chair V

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9801778

    Original file (9801778.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was discharged on 23 July 1982 in the grade of airman with a general characterization and an RE code of “2B” (Separated with other than an honorable discharge). The discharge complied with directives in effect at the time, the applicant’s military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his discharge or RE code should be upgraded.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9801847

    Original file (9801847.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). He received an RE code of “2H: Participating in Track 4 or 5 of the Substance Abuse Reorientation and Treatment (SART) program for drugs, or has failed to complete Track 4.” Applicant’s military personnel records indicate he received a general discharge for “A Pattern of Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary Infractions.” This type of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9801633

    Original file (9801633.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). - 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. Applicant did not identi@ any specific errors in the discharg&progessing nor provide facts which warrant a change in the discharge he received.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9700732

    Original file (9700732.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant provided additional evidence and requested that his case be reconsidered. The applicant did not provide any documentation showing he was actually in Vietnam, on or , and in direct support of Operation FREQUENT WIND. BARBARA A. WESTGATE Panel Chair Exhibits: Exhibit E. Record of Proceedings, dated 23 Oct 97.