Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201970
Original file (0201970.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBERS:  02-01970
            INDEX CODE 106.00
            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His 1972 general 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 applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force 25 Mar 71. During  the
period in question he was a security policemen assigned to  the  313th
Security Police Squadron at Forbes AFB,  KS.  His  Airman  Performance
Report had an overall rating of 6.

He received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) on 12 Aug 71  for  failing  to
perform duty as bay orderly.

On 10 Mar 72, the applicant attempted to turn in his  security  police
shield and restricted area badge,  stating  he  was  through  being  a
“cop.”  He indicated he would use his  gun  on  other  individuals  if
ordered to carry his weapon. He related he was depressed, nervous  and
wanted  out  of  the  Air  Force  because  of  his  family  situation.
Counseling was offered without any positive response.

On 13 Mar 72, he was restricted from carrying a weapon and, on  16 Mar
72, reclassification was recommended.

A Forbes Form 31, Psychiatric Evaluation, dated 20  Mar  72,  provided
little detail other than a diagnosis of  immature  personality  and  a
recommendation for an administrative discharge.

On 21 Mar  72,  the  applicant  received  an  Article  15  for  making
disrespectful comments and threats to his supervisor  on  20  Mar  72.
Punishment was reduction from the  grade  of  airman  first  class  to
airman, 7 days of correctional custody and  forfeiture  of  $67.00  in
pay. The applicant did not submit statements or appeal the punishment.

On 14 Apr 72, he was notified of his commander’s intent  to  recommend
him for a general discharge for unsuitability. This was based  on  the
psychiatric exam “which revealed that he has a character and  behavior
disorder, immature personality type, manifested by failure to  repair,
failure to carry out assigned tasks, threatening superiors with bodily
harm, inability to cope with stresses of military.” The applicant  did
not submit a statement or request probation and rehabilitation.

The case was found legally sufficient by the staff judge  advocate  on
25 Apr 72. The discharge authority  approved  the  recommendation  for
discharge on 2 May 72.

The applicant  was  discharged  with  a  general  characterization  of
service on 5 May 72 in the grade of airman. He had 1 year, 1 month and
11 days of active service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS provided their rationale for recommending denial.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 9 Jul 02 for review and comment within 30  days.   As  of
this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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 a thorough review  of  the
evidence of record, we are not persuaded that the applicant’s  general
discharge should be upgraded to honorable. He  has  submitted  nothing
that demonstrates his general discharge was unwarranted, unduly  harsh
or beyond the commander’s  authority.  We  therefore  agree  with  the
recommendations of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed  as
the basis for our decision that the applicant has  failed  to  sustain
his burden of having suffered either an error or an injustice. In view
of the above and absent persuasive evidence to the contrary,  we  find
no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

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  in
Executive Session on 3 October 2002 under the provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                 Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Panel Chair
                 Mr. George Franklin, Member
                 Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Member

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number 02-
01970 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 Jun 02.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 3 Jul 02.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Jul 02.




                                   WAYNE R. GRACIE
                                   Panel Chair


Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02975

    Original file (BC-2007-02975.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 4 Mar 72, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for unsuitability. The complete AFPC/DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit E. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and states his discharge was based entirely on his mental disability. The applicant's case was not eligible for a referral for a Medical Evaluation Board...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201955

    Original file (0201955.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01955 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. That office indicates that the applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge proceedings. After a...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03785

    Original file (BC-2006-03785.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was discharged on 29 Mar 73. Other than his own assertions, the applicant has provided no evidence that would lead us to believe the actions taken to effect his discharge were improper, or that the information in his discharge case file is erroneous. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Jan 07; AFBCMR dated 26 Jan 07.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0202274

    Original file (0202274.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was discharged with an entry-level separation with character of service listed as uncharacterized on 21 August 1997 in the grade of airman first class. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 2 Aug 02. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Aug 02.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03060

    Original file (BC-2002-03060.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS stated that the applicant’s personnel records did not include any information as to why he received a general discharge versus an honorable discharge. As of this date, this office has received no response (Exhibit E). WAYNE R. GRACIE Panel Chair AFBCMR 02-03060 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03060

    Original file (BC-2002-03060.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS stated that the applicant’s personnel records did not include any information as to why he received a general discharge versus an honorable discharge. As of this date, this office has received no response (Exhibit E). WAYNE R. GRACIE Panel Chair AFBCMR 02-03060 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00424

    Original file (BC-2006-00424.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ___________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 19 Apr 74, in the grade of airman basic (E-1), for a period of six years. Punishment imposed was a reduction in grade to airman (E-2) and forfeiture of $100 for one month; (10) O/a 3 and 4 Apr 78, applicant received an Article 15 for failure to go to his prescribed place of duty on time. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01029

    Original file (BC-2002-01029.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01029 INDEX CODE: A50.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His other than honorable conditions (undesirable) discharge be upgraded to general. The evidence of record reflects that the applicant was discharged for unfitness. Exhibit F. Letter, applicant, dated 13 Jul 02, w/atchs.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201613

    Original file (0201613.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s contention is at odds with the facts provided by his record. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 0000152

    Original file (0000152.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The recommendation for discharge for misconduct was approved and the commander directed that applicant be given an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. On 23 Dec 83, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39- 10 (Misconduct-Pattern of Minor Disciplinary Infractions) in the grade of airman first class with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge and an RE code of 2B (Separated with other than an honorable discharge). Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS,...