RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02021
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: AMERICAN LEGION
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an
honorable discharge.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was very proud of his service in the Air Force and was very upset over
his discharge. It is clear by reviewing his Airman Performance Reports
(APRs) that he took pride in his work. He believes that the circumstances
surrounding his discharge were his fault.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 23 September 1983 in the
grade of airman basic for a period of 4 years.
On 20 June 1986, the applicant was notified of his commander's intent to
initiate discharge action against him for misconduct - discreditable
involvement with military authorities (specific reasons at Exhibit B).
The commander indicated in his recommendation for discharge action that the
applicant had been continually unable to conform to basic standards of his
job and the regulations of the Air Force. He had been counseled by his
supervisors, first sergeant, and the commander on his performance and
conduct and necessity to meet the standards expected of him with little or
no effect. The last effort towards rehabilitation as a result of Article
15 action was to put him in correctional custody. His ratings (commander’s
weekly evaluations) in comparison with others in correctional custody were
weak. The applicant completed 25 days in correctional custody. The
commander did not recommend probation and rehabilitation. Numerous and
varied efforts to rehabilitate the applicant failed completely, and there
was no indication further rehabilitative efforts would have been
successful.
The commander advised applicant of his right to consult legal counsel and
submit statements in his own behalf; or waive the above rights after
consulting with counsel.
On 23 June 1986, after consulting with counsel, applicant waived his right
to submit statements in his own behalf.
On 24 June 1986, the Staff Judge Advocate recommended the applicant be
administratively separated from the Air Force and furnished a general
(under honorable conditions) discharge, without probation and
rehabilitation.
On 30 June 1986, the administrative discharge was approved.
A resume of the applicant's performance reports follows:
PERIOD ENDING OVERALL EVALUATION
17 Jul 84 9
13 May 85 9
13 May 86 8
Applicant was discharged on 2 July 1986, in the grade of airman first
class, with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions),
in accordance with AFR 39-10 (Misconduct - Pattern Discreditable
Involvement with Military or Civil Authorities). He completed 2 years, 9
months and 10 days of total active duty service.
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of investigation,
Clarksburg, West Virginia, indicated they were unable to identify with
arrest record on basis of information furnished (Exhibit C).
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied. They indicate that the
commander notified the member on 20 June 1986 that he was being discharged
for a pattern of misconduct-discreditable involvement with military
authorities. On 11, 21, 22, 24, and 25 April 1986, he wrote bad checks to
the Base Exchange and received a letter of reprimand (LOR) on 5 June 1986.
On 7 February 1986, the member failed to go at the time prescribed to his
appointed place of duty. He received an Article 15, a suspended reduction
to airman, suspended $100 fine and 30 days correctional custody, of which
he received remission after 25 days. On 25 June 1985, 9 September 1985 and
3 January 1986, he failed to repair and received an LOR for each offense.
On 29 August 1984, 25 September 1984 and 3 April 1985, he failed to repair
and received a letter of counseling for each offense.
Based on the documentation in the file, they believe the discharge was
consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the
discharge regulation. Additionally, the discharge was within the sound
discretion of the discharge authority.
The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or
injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. He provided no other
facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge. He has not filed a timely
request.
The evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Counsel’s response to the evaluation is attached at Exhibit F.
On 5 October 2001, the Board staff requested the applicant provide post-
service documentation within thirty (30) days. Applicant’s response, with
attachments, is at Exhibit H.
_________________________________________________________________
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 regarding the applicant’s request to have
his discharge upgraded to honorable. No evidence has been presented which
would lead us to believe his discharge was improper or contrary to the
directive under which it was effected. Nevertheless, the Board majority
finds that in view of the applicant’s successful transition to civilian
life, as evidenced by the post-service documentation he has provided, we
are of the opinion that upgrading his discharge to honorable, based on
clemency, would be appropriate. Accordingly, the Board majority recommends
that the applicant’s general (under honorable conditions) discharge be
upgraded to honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
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 July 1986, he was honorably
discharged and issued an Honorable Discharge Certificate.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive
Session on 28 November 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Terry A. Yonkers, Panel Chair
Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Member
Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Member
By a majority vote, the Board voted to correct the records, as recommended.
Mr. Barbino voted to deny the application and does not desire to submit a
minority report. The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 August 2001, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. FBI Report.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 12 September 2001.
Exhibit E. Letters, SAF/MIBR, dated 21 September 2001.
Exhibit F. Letter, Counsel, dated 11 October 2001, w/atchs.
Exhibit G. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 5 October 2001, w/atch.
Exhibit H. Letter, Applicant, dated 1 November 2001, w/atchs.
TERRY A. YONKERS
Panel Chair
AFBCMR 01-02021
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:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to , be corrected to show that on 2 July 1986, he was honorably
discharged and issued an Honorable Discharge Certificate.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03560
The applicant completed 25 days in correctional custody. In an application to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) dated 21 August 2001, the applicant requested his general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2005-03560 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...
The evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE states that they find no documentation to support the Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2P, “Absent without leave (AWOL); deserter or dropped from rolls (DFR).” However, based on documentation and member’s narrative reason for separation “marginal performer” they recommend the applicant’s code be changed to 2C “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service” which they feel...
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member who was discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge on 7 October 1958, under the provisions of AFR 39-16 (Discharge for inaptitude or unsuitability - other reasons) and Letter, Department of the Air Force, dated 1 December 1955, “Discharge of Airmen During Their First Enlistment.” He had served 2 years and 5 months on active duty. It appears that...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01584
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 21 June 1983, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force in the grade of airman basic for a period of four (4) years. As of this date, no response has been received by this office. On 23 June 2004, the Board staff requested the applicant provide post- service documentation within 14 days (Exhibit F) and on 8 July 2004, the Board provided the applicant the opportunity to respond to the FBI...
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 5 October 2001, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. While we are not certain as to why the applicant did not participate during the period January 1986 to October 1986, we note that had he requested to be transferred to the Retired Reserve in December...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03398
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03398 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 commander indicated in his recommendation for discharge action that before...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00718
He indicates he completed his term in the Air Force prior to being incarcerated for 17 years; therefore, receiving no veteran benefits, especially medical assistance with his stroke, is an injustice. On 10 June 1986, the Staff Judge Advocate indicated he concurred with the board’s recommendation and recommended to the discharge authority that the findings of the ADB be approved as well as the applicant’s discharge with an under other than honorable conditions characterization,...
Applicant submitted a written statement to the discharge authority along with two letters of support. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPAES reviewed applicant's request and states that the RE code is correct (see Exhibit C). _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant's response to the Air Force advisories states that DPPRS was incorrect in stating that...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01036
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01036 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable to allow him to serve in the South Carolina National Guard during this time of conflict. Applicant was discharged on 18 June 1986, in the grade of...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response, within 30 days (Exhibit D). 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.