RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-01822
INDEX CODE 126.04 108.04 110.02
COUNSEL: None
HEARING DESIRED: No
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. The punishment imposed upon him under Article 15, Uniform Code of
Military Justice (UCMJ), dated 13 March 1998, and a Vacation of
Suspended Nonjudicial Punishment action, dated 10 April 1998, be
removed from his records.
2. His 1998 general discharge be changed to a medical retirement and
he be allowed to retire as a staff sergeant (SSgt), the highest grade
he held.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The reasons applicant believes he has been the victim of an error
and/or an injustice are contained in his complete submission, which is
at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant was discharged in the grade of senior airman (SRA) on 4
August 1998 with a general discharge (Misconduct) with 10 years, 8
months, and 17 days of active duty. His performance reports from 1988
to 1997 reflect the following: 9,9, 5 (New Rating System), 5, 5, 5, 4,
5, 5, 4, 4, 4, 4 and 3 (Referral).
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted
from the applicant's military records (Exhibit B), are contained in
the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force
(Exhibits C, D, E and F). Accordingly, there is no need to recite
these facts in this Record of Proceedings.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Associate Chief, Military Justice Division, AFLSA/JAJM, reviewed
the appeal with respect to the Article 15 and vacation actions and
provides his rationale for recommending denial.
A copy of the complete Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C.
The AFBCMR Medical Consultant, also reviewed the appeal regarding the
medical issues and provides his rational for recommending denial.
A copy of the complete Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit D.
The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, reviewed the
appeal with respect to the applicant’s reduction in grade and defers
to the recommendation of AFLSA/JAJM.
A copy of the complete Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit E.
The Chief, Special Actions/BCMR Advisories, HQ AFPC/DPPD, verified
that the applicant was never referred to or considered by the Air
Force Disability Evaluation System. The medical aspects of the case
are fully explained by the Medical Consultant and the Chief concurs
with that advisory. Denial is recommended.
A copy of the complete Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit F.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Complete copies of the evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on
28 September 1998 and 24 May 1999 for review and comment within 30
days. As of this date, nor response has been received by this office.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing
law or regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of probable error or injustice. After a thorough review
of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, a majority of
the Board concludes that no relief is warranted. The applicant’s
contentions are duly noted, as were his many accomplishments while in
the Air Force. However, the Board majority believes the evidence of
record indicates the commander’s actions were not unfair or unduly
harsh. In this regard, the commander exercised graduated punishment by
first imposing a Letter of Reprimand, then an Article 15 with a
suspended punishment, and finally a vacation of the suspension. The
Board majority further believes the applicant has not provided
convincing evidence supporting his allegation that his difficulties
were precipitated by medical and legal problems. The Board majority
also concluded that this case did not warrant a medical retirement.
Although the applicant’s immunodeficiency diagnosis led to a permanent
P-3 profile excluding him from overseas duty or deployment, his
medical condition was not one considered unfitting for continued
military duty. This was true up to his discharge when medical review
again found him stable and without evidence of overt disease. As he
had no unfitting condition, the majority of the Board agrees with the
AFBCMR Medical Consultant that consideration for medical separation or
retirement was inappropriate.
_________________________________________________________________
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 6 July 1999, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Mr. Gary Appleton, Member
Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Member
By a majority vote, the Board recommended denial of the application.
Mr. Appleton voted to void the Article 15 and the vacated suspension
and grant a medical separation, but he does not wish to submit a
Minority Report. The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149s, dated 16 Jun & 18 Aug 98, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFLSA/JAJM, dated 1 Sep 98.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 5 Apr 99.
Exhibit E. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 20 Apr 99.
Exhibit F. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPD, dated 30 Apr 99.
Exhibit G. Letters, AFBCMR, dated 28 Sep 98 & 24 May 99.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
A copy of a Summary Report of Inquiry prepared by HQ PACAF/JAC regarding applicant’s allegations that Senior Master Sergeant K is alleged to have caused applicant to receive punishment in forms of a letter of admonishment (LOA) and an Article 15 is attached at Exhibit G. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Deputy Chief, Military Justice Division, Air Force Legal Services Agency, AFLSA/JAJM, reviewed this application and states that the...
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, AFPC/DPPPWB, also reviewed this application and states that the applicant has been advised through his servicing Military Personnel Flight (MPF) that he was not eligible to be promoted to airman until 11 February 1999, the day following the suspended discharge and will not be eligible for promotion to A1C until 11 December 1999 upon completion of the required 10 months (TIG) provided he...
There are no provisions for pro-rating ASP/ISP for active duty Air Force physicians facing mandatory separation. Counsel submitted a response and states that although applicant was given a separation date of 30 September 1997, he was extended for medical reasons until 31 December 1997 and that during this time he performed the same duties he had been performing when he previously received both ASP and ISP payments. Applicant received a letter, dated 10 February 1997, which indicated that...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-00224 INDEX CODES: 111.02, 126.04 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, imposed on 16 Nov 98, be set aside and removed from his records, and that all rights, privileges, and benefits taken from him because of the Article 15 be restored. A complete copy...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: 00-03277 INDEX CODE 126.02 131.09 129.04 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be reinstated to the grade of E5/staff sergeant (SSgt) and promoted to E6/technical sergeant (TSgt) by setting aside the punishment imposed on him by Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), dated 31 Oct 95,...
On 4 August 1998, the vacation of the suspended reduction was set aside, and she was returned to the grade of A1C with a date of rank and effective date of 30 December 1997. Therefore, we agree with opinions and recommendations of the Air Force and adopt their rationale as the basis for the conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02844
The applicant has provided no evidence of a clear error or injustice related to the nonjudicial punishment action. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of 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...
In DPPD’s view, the applicant has not submitted any material or documentation to show he was improperly rated or processed under the provisions of the military disability laws and policy at the time of his permanent disability retirement. Accordingly, a majority of the Board finds no basis to recommend favorable action on the applicant’s requests. A majority found that applicant had not provided sufficient evidence of error or injustice regarding the applicant’s requests that the Article...
He was not absent without leave (AWOL) [the basis for the Article 15] because he had a third amended order, dated 9 January 1997, that extended his TDY at Wilford Hall Medical Center (WHMC), Lackland AFB, for a total of 176 days, and was given verbal authorization to remain TDY after his medical evaluation board (MEB) was concluded. A copy of the complete Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C. The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, evaluated the appeal and stated that the...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1997-03180
He was not absent without leave (AWOL) [the basis for the Article 15] because he had a third amended order, dated 9 January 1997, that extended his TDY at Wilford Hall Medical Center (WHMC), Lackland AFB, for a total of 176 days, and was given verbal authorization to remain TDY after his medical evaluation board (MEB) was concluded. A copy of the complete Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C. The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, evaluated the appeal and stated that the...