ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-01783
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, he requests that
his general discharge be upgraded to honorable.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant was discharged with a general (under honorable conditions)
discharge on 10 November 1993 because of misconduct. He served 1 year, 10
months and 28 days.
On 19 June 1998, the applicant submitted an application requesting his
general under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable. On
12 September 2000, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s request.
A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit E.
The applicant submitted an application dated 21 April 2002, again
requesting that his general under honorable conditions discharge be
upgraded to honorable. In support of his request, he provided a copy of
his NGB 22, Departments of the Army and the Air Force National Guard Bureau
Report of Separation and Record of Service, and a copy of his Air National
Guard Enlistment/Reenlistment Document.
In his most-recent application, the applicant indicated he believes his
military service record and a general discharge do not properly depict his
service to the country. He was discharged during a period of downsizing
and therefore, his minor acts of misconduct were his commander’s quickest
way out of rehabilitating him as an airman. After college, he felt an
emptiness about his service and was able to enlist in the Army National
Guard and then the Air National Guard, where is is currently serving
honorably in a hard-to-fill career field. He is so sure his general
discharge is wrong that he chose this roundabout way to right his record.
His two honorable periods of service in different National Guard units
prove that he is capable of being characterized as an honorable member.
Under the current climate and with stop-loss in effect, he does not believe
he would be subjected to such a quick removal from the Air Force.
His complete submission, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit F.
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. After again reviewing this application and the evidence provided in
support of the appeal, we remain unpersuaded that the applicant’s discharge
from the Regular Air Force in 1993 was improper or contrary to the
provisions of the governing regulations and policies then in effect. While
it appears that, commencing 1999, the applicant obtained waivers of his
involuntary separation with a general (under honorable conditions)
discharge from the Regular Air Force in order to enlist first in the Army
National Guard and then in the Air National Guard, it is our opinion that
this fact, in and by itself, does not render the discharge under review
incorrect or inequitable. The evidence provided by the applicant seems to
indicate that since his separation, he has become a more responsible
individual. We commend him for his efforts in this regard. However, we
have seen no evidence that would lead us to believe the information in his
discharge case file is erroneous, that he was not afforded all rights to
which he was entitled, or that his commanders abused their discretionary
authority. Therefore, we are not inclined to favorably consider his
request that his discharge from the Regular Air Force be upgraded to
honorable.
2. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown
that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to
our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request for a
hearing is not favorably considered.
________________________________________________________________
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.
_______________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive
Session on 15 November 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Peggy E. Gordon, Panel Chair
Ms. Dorothy P. Loeb, Member
Mr. Mike Novel, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit E. Record of Proceedings, dated 14 Sep 00,
w/Exhibits A through D.
Exhibit F. Applicant’s Application, dated 21 Apr 02,
w/atchs.
PEGGY E. GORDON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02499
The requested time is documented on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, from his enlistment with the USMC. DPPI states that since the applicant voluntarily enlisted with NavRes, on 29 March 1990, at a lower grade (E-3), and, because he did not qualify for enlistment with the FL ANG as an E-6, he is not entitled to count the time spent in the USMC as an E-6. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case...
___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Upon his release from active duty, he transferred to the Air Force Reserve and never received an orientation from his unit of assignment on the requirements needed for proper credit toward a good year for retirement. If he had that support upon his assignment to the Cat B position in the Air Force Reserve, he would not be asking for the credit. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03557
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: On 7 January 1999 he was married while in the process of transferring between duty stations: Kunsan Air Base (AB), South Korea, to Hill Air Force Base (AFB), Utah. We took note of his complete submission in judging the merits of this case and while we support the Discharge Review Board’s act of clemency in upgrading his discharge, we are not persuaded he has suffered either an error or...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-00493
Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice warranting changes to the applicant’s reenlistment eligibility. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case to include his assertion that he was forced to retire early as his ex- wife was also a member of the SC ANG. However, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air National Guard office of primary responsibility and adopt their...
Applicant’s request for a fully honorable discharge was considered, however, a review of his overall record does not support a further upgrade. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that at the time of his discharge on 14 September 1982, he was discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). PEGGY...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02087
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02087 INDEX CODE: 128.06 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His eligibility for bonus/loan repayment entitlements be reconsidered. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was informed the he was eligible for the student loan and...
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Separations Branch, Directorate of Personnel Program Management, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed this application and states that information reflected on his WD AGO Form 53-59, they find no evidence to indicate the applicant's discharge, over 48 years ago, was incorrect, an injustice occurred to the applicant, or 97- 03744 that the discharge did not comply with the discharge directive in effective at the time of his discharge. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation...
Applicant submitted a similar request to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB); however, since his discharge occurred over 15 years ago, his request was returned without action and he was advised to submit his current appeal to the Board. The applicant did not submit any new evidence of identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing, and provided no facts warranting an upgrade of his discharge. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03131
The applicant submitted a request to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to have his under honorable conditions (general) discharge upgraded to honorable. Based on the information and evidence provided they recommend the applicant's request be denied (Exhibit D). Based on the documentation in the applicant's records, it appears that the processing of the discharge and the characterization of the discharge were appropriate and accomplished in accordance with Air Force policy.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03131
The applicant submitted a request to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to have his under honorable conditions (general) discharge upgraded to honorable. Based on the information and evidence provided they recommend the applicant's request be denied (Exhibit D). Based on the documentation in the applicant's records, it appears that the processing of the discharge and the characterization of the discharge were appropriate and accomplished in accordance with Air Force policy.