Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200073
Original file (0200073.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-00073
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

      APPLICANT  COUNSEL:  None

      SSN   HEARING DESIRED: No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded  to  an
honorable discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was young at that time and now that he has realized  the  direction
of his life as a minister and pastor, he wishes to  correct  his  past
(Exhibit A).

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from  the
applicant's military records, are contained in the letter prepared  by
the appropriate office of the Air Force.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS states that based on the documentation in  the  applicant's
records, they believe that the applicant's  discharge  was  consistent
with the procedural and  substantive  requirements  of  the  discharge
regulation and that the discharge was within the sound  discretion  of
discharge authority.  DPPRS further states that the applicant has  not
submitted any new evidence or identified any errors or injustices that
may have occurred during his discharge processing.  The applicant  has
not provided any supporting documentation  to  warrant  upgrading  his
discharge.  DPPRS recommends denying the applicant's request.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 15 February 2002, for review and response.   As  of  this
date, no 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 not timely filed;  however,  it  is  in  the
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the  existence  of  probable  error  or  injustice.    After   careful
consideration of the circumstances  of  this  case  and  the  evidence
provided by the applicant, we are not persuaded that the discharge  he
received was in error or unjust.   Applicant’s  contentions  are  duly
noted; however, we agree with the opinion and  recommendation  of  the
Air Force and adopt their rationale as the basis  for  our  conclusion
that the applicant has not been the victim of an error  or  injustice.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to  the  contrary,  we  find  no
compelling basis to recommend  granting  the  relief  sought  in  this
application.

_________________________________________________________________

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   Docket  Number  02-
00073 in Executive Session on March 28, 2002, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Member
                 Mr. James E. Short, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Dec 01, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 7 Feb 02.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Feb 02.




                                  RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                  Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200929

    Original file (0200929.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the applicant's military records (Exhibit B) and in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force (Exhibit C). After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his UOTHC discharge should be upgraded to honorable. Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 4 Apr 02.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200444

    Original file (0200444.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00444 INDEX CODE 100.06 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed to allow her enlistment in the Armed Forces. Although the applicant states that she requested discharge, there is no letter from the applicant requesting a discharge. Insufficient...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02807

    Original file (BC-2002-02807.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant was discharged from the Air Force on 7 Jun 85. He petitioned the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to upgrade his discharge to honorable in 1993. We find no evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we do not believe he has been the victim of an injustice.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200878

    Original file (0200878.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The reasons the applicant believes the records to be in error or unjust and the evidence submitted in support of the appeal are at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00579

    Original file (BC-2006-00579.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He did his separation paperwork on 20 Jul 02, one month shy of the six months; therefore, he received a RE code of 4E, even though his military separation date with the United States Air Force was 5 Sep 02. He was assigned RE code “4E” which denotes “Grade is airman first class or below and airman completed 31 or more months (55 months for 6-year enlistees), if a first-term airman; or, grade is airman first class or below and the airman is a second-term or career airman.” He was assigned...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200921

    Original file (0200921.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that based on the documentation in the file, the discharge...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201424

    Original file (0201424.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the discharge was consistent with procedural and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04021

    Original file (BC-2002-04021.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 20 Nov 91, the discharge authority approved the recommended separation and directed that the applicant be issued an entry level separation. The applicant did not provide any evidence showing the information in the discharge case file was erroneous, his substantial rights were violated, or that his commanders abused their discretionary authority. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200834

    Original file (0200834.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that they believe the discharge was consistent with procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that relief should be granted. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03012

    Original file (BC-2002-03012.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03012 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. Although the pathology report of removed tissues were consistent with Crohn’s Disease, medical records between the time of his August 1985 hospital discharge and his...