RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01253
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His discharge be upgraded to honorable.
________________________________________________________________
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.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS states that 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. A complete copy of the
evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 17 May 2002, a complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was
forwarded to the applicant for review and response 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. We took notice of the
applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case;
however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Staff
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 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 on 11
July 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Lawrence R. Leehy, Panel Chair
Ms. Diane Arnold, Member
Mr. E. David Hoard, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 3 Apr 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 26 Apr 02.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 17 May 2002.
LAWRENCE R. LEEHY
Panel Chair
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPRS determined that based on the documentation in the applicant’s file, his discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluation were forwarded to the applicant on 28 Jun 02 for review and comment...
The commander advised the applicant that if his recommendation was approved, his discharge would be described as an uncharacterized entry-level discharge and he would be ineligible for reenlistment in the Air Force. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS states that they believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation at the time of his discharge from active duty. 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 (Exhibit C). On 28 January 2001, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant's request to upgrade his discharge to honorable. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 March 2002.
The applicant was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder and personality disorder unsuiting for continued military service. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 28 June 2002 for review and comment within 30 days. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however,...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01248 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. They concluded that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the 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. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the...
The applicant should not have been allowed to enlist in the Air Force with asthma. Other 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: The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed this application and recommended denial. We took notice of the applicant's complete...
During his enlistment he received one Airman Performance Report for the period 15 January 1973 - 22 May 1973 with an overall evaluation of five (5). Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provided a copy of an investigative report pertaining to the applicant, which is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be approved. Having found no error or injustice...
The Board was persuaded by the letters of support the applicant provided from other members of the aircrew on the flight that he sustained injuries. Therefore, the Board recommends that the applicant’s records be corrected as indicated below. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 19 Jul 02.
He would not have enlisted in the Air Force if not for the guarantee he received from the recruiter. On 22 June 1998, he signed a statement indicating he was a homosexual and he requested he be discharged from the Air Force for homosexual conduct. The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE states that RE code 2C, “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service” is correct.