Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200571
Original file (0200571.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-00571
            INDEX NUMBER:  100.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Under Other than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be  upgraded  to
a general discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

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 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  was  consistent  with
the procedural and substantive requirements  of  the  discharge  regulation.
Additionally,  the  discharge  was  within  the  sound  discretion  of   the
discharge authority and the applicant did not submit  any  new  evidence  or
identify  any  errors  or  injustices  that  occurred   in   the   discharge
processing.  He provided no facts warranting an upgrade of his discharge.

The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________






APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded  to  the  applicant  on  22
March 2002 for review and comment within 30  days.   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 error or injustice.  After thoroughly  reviewing  the  evidence
of record and  noting  the  applicant’s  complete  submission,  we  find  no
evidence of  error  or  injustice.   In  this  respect,  we  note  that  the
applicant’s discharge appears to be in compliance  with  the  governing  Air
Force Regulation in effect  at  the  time  of  his  separation  and  he  was
afforded all the rights to which entitled.  The applicant  has  provided  no
evidence to indicate that his  separation  was  inappropriate.  There  being
insufficient evidence to the  contrary,  we  find  no  compelling  basis  to
recommend granting the relief sought.

4.  We also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that  the
discharge be upgraded  on  the  basis  of  clemency.   In  this  regard,  we
considered the applicant's overall quality  of  service,  the  events  which
precipitated the discharge, and the absence  of  evidence  relating  to  his
post-service activities and accomplishments.

________________________________________________________________

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  evidence  not
considered with this application.

________________________________________________________________





The following members of the Board  considered  Docket  Number  02-00571  in
Executive Session on 16 May 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                  Mr. Jackson A. Hauslein, Panel Chair
                  Ms. Diana Arnold, Member
                  Ms. Carolyn B. Willis, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 8 Feb 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 11 Mar 02.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Mar 02.




                                   JACKSON A. HAUSLEIN
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200766

    Original file (0200766.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00766 INDEX NUMBER: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicant’s complete submission, we find no evidence of error or injustice. In this respect, we note that...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200158

    Original file (0200158.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00158 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS states although there is a lack of documenation in the file to discuss his discharge, they...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200572

    Original file (0200572.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00572 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. We conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200131

    Original file (0200131.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00131 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded to honorable. We conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances. Exhibit B.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201085

    Original file (0201085.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 (Exhibit C). The Air Force Discharge Review Board reviewed the case on 15 December 1975 (appeared with counsel) and 10 July 1979, and determined no change in the discharge was warranted. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200658

    Original file (0200658.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00658 INDEX NUMBER: 100.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, dated 21 October 1973, be amended in Item 30, Remarks, to reflect Vietnam - Yes. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200437

    Original file (0200437.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant's military records (Exhibit B), are contained in the official document provided in the applicant’s submission (Exhibit A) 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 her...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200239

    Original file (0200239.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He served 6 months and 9 days total active duty service with 11 days lost time. Additionally, he provided no facts warranting an upgrade of his discharge. As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200481

    Original file (0200481.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00481 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On 24 March 1988, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied applicant’s request for an upgrade of his general...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200280

    Original file (0200280.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. On 7 Jan 80, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for being in a fight on 10 Dec 79 at Peterson AFB, CO. His APRs reflect superior performance; however, despite drug rehabilitation and an Article 15 for marijuana possession, the applicant’s...