RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02799
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general (under honorable
conditions) discharge.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The reasons he believes the records to be in error or unjust and the
evidence submitted in support of his appeal is 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 B.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial. Based upon the documentation in the
file and the seriousness of the offenses, DPPRS believes the discharge
was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the
discharge directives in effect at the time of his discharge. He had
29 days lost time. The applicant did not submit any new evidence or
identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge
processing. Additionally, he provided no facts warranting an upgrade
of his discharge. He did not file a timely request.
AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 4 October 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 an error or injustice. After a thorough review
of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not
persuaded that his discharge should be upgraded to general (under
honorable conditions). We find no impropriety in the characterization
of the applicant's discharge. It appears that responsible officials
applied appropriate standards in effecting the separation, and we do
not find persuasive evidence that pertinent regulations were violated
or that the applicant was not afforded all the rights to which
entitled at the time of discharge. We conclude, therefore, that the
discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the
discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances. The Board is
of the opinion that the documents submitted by the applicant do not
provide any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that
occurred in the discharge processing. In the absence of such
evidence, favorable action is not recommended.
_________________________________________________________________
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 this
application.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered Docket Number 02-02799
in Executive Session on 20 November 2002, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
Mr. Robert S. Boyd, Member
Mr. John B. Hennessey, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 Aug 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 23 Sep 02.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Oct 02.
MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02302
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02302 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The characterization of his discharge be upgraded from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable and the narrative reason for separation and reentry (RE) code be changed to allow him to serve his country once again. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02746
The Discharge Authority approved his discharge and ordered a general discharge. Additionally, the applicant provided no facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge he received. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his discharge should be upgraded to honorable.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01736 INDEX CODE: 110.00 APPLICANT COUNSEL: None SSN HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. 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. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03400
DPPRS notes the DRB denial of the applicant’s appeal on 13 March 1986. Applicant's complete statement with attachments is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. In this respect, we note that his record of performance prior to the incident which led to his discharge, was excellent.
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02603
On 15 April 1958, the Air Force Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request to upgrade his discharge. Applicant's complete response is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his discharge should be upgraded to honorable.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03432
DPPRS states that the applicant’s request is not timely and that the applicant did not provide any new evidence nor identify any errors or injustices that occurred during the discharge action. (Exhibit C) _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant claims that his records have been “…messed with.”; that his mistakes with alcohol were minor when compared to the mistakes of “…some of our country’s leaders.”; and...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03148
He received a General Under Honorable Conditions discharge under the provisions of AFR 39-16 (Discharge of Airmen During Their First Enlistment - Unsuitability). DPPRS notes also that the applicant provided no evidence of any errors or injustices that occurred during discharge processing, nor did the applicant provide any facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge he received. Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 4 Nov 02.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03148
He received a General Under Honorable Conditions discharge under the provisions of AFR 39-16 (Discharge of Airmen During Their First Enlistment - Unsuitability). DPPRS notes also that the applicant provided no evidence of any errors or injustices that occurred during discharge processing, nor did the applicant provide any facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge he received. Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 4 Nov 02.
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03592
On 28 December 1990, the applicant was notified by his commander that he was recommending that he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 35-10, Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure, with an honorable discharge. On 28 December 1990 the applicant submitted a conditional waiver to an administrative review board contingent on receiving no less than an honorable discharge. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree...
The member was placed on AWOL status again on 31 March 1975. There is no other documentation about the member’s discharge in his records. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number 02- 01495 in Executive Session on 6 August 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair Mr. Billy C. Baxter, Member Mr. James W. Russell, Member The following documentary evidence was...