RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02625
INDEX CODE: 110.00
APPLICANT COUNSEL: None
SSN HEARING DESIRED: No
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to
honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He decided to enter the Air Force before he completed high school. He
successfully completed basic training and tech school and was assigned
to Ft Lee. After arriving at Ft Lee, he asked the first sergeant
about what he needed to do to get enrolled in high school. The first
sergeant sent him to the Education Center. He was told at the
Education Center, that all he needed to do to complete his high school
education was to take a series of tests. He was not allowed to take
classes to complete his high school education, he was only offered to
take a series of tests for the General Equivalency Diploma (GED). He
complained all the way up to the commander, who, after meeting with
him, referred him for a mental evaluation. He was notified a few
weeks later that he would be receiving a general discharge.
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is attached at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic on
14 January 1963 for a period of four years.
The remaining 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 20 September 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 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 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 AFBCMR Docket Number 02-
02625 in Executive Session on November 6, 2002, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Panel Chair
Mr. John E. Pettit, Member
Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Aug 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 5 Sep 02.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Sep 02.
ROSCOE HINTON, JR.
Panel Chair
The reason for the request was that on 22 June 1987, the member waived his right to a hearing before an administrative discharge board with the understanding that he would receive no less than a general discharge. Subsequently, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10 paragraph 5-46, for misconduct based on minor disciplinary infractions and received a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. After careful consideration of the applicant’s request and the...
His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states that when he enlisted in the Air Force he didn’t have to go to BMT and would be put in an on-the-job training status in supply. The applicant has provided no evidence showing the information in his discharge case file was erroneous, his substantial rights were...
The remaining 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: HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03008
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC 2002-03008 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His separation program designator (SPD) code be changed from LCC (released from active duty) to JCC (discharge) and his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 4D be changed on his DD Form 214,...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03008
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC 2002-03008 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His separation program designator (SPD) code be changed from LCC (released from active duty) to JCC (discharge) and his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 4D be changed on his DD Form 214,...
He received an RE Code of 2B, which defined means "Involuntarily separated under AFR 39-10 with a general discharge or under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge.” Applicant's discharge case file is not in his military personnel records; therefore, the facts surrounding his separation from the Air Force cannot be verified. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the...
On 5 Oct 61, he was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-18, Special Court-Martial Order # 102, and HQ HQLMTC/JA letter with a bad conduct discharge. At that time, the applicant was again invited to provide additional evidence pertaining to his activities since leaving the service (Exhibit G). Exhibit G. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 17 Jul 02, w/atchs.
He received an RE Code of 2C, which defined means "Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service.” The remaining 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 Force at Exhibits C, D and E. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01768
At the time she was released, she took her end of course exams twice and failed both times due to working 12 hour days and suffering a miscarriage. 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 offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02418
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 0202418 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded so he can be buried in a national cemetery. AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant's sister...