Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03482
Original file (BC-2002-03482.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-03482
            INDEX CODE:  110.02
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His narrative reason for discharge be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The offenses he committed during his active duty military service were
inappropriate but those actions are now a hindrance to his future.  He
states that during his exploration of youth he managed to experience a
normal maturity process and in part of that exploration  he  lost  the
respect of the country he loves and his acceptance to serve  it.   The
applicant states that he now  understands  that  the  results  of  his
actions were not only costly  to  him,  but  to  the  government.   He
apologizes for his actions and requests these changes as an adult.

In support of his request, applicant provided  a  personal  statement.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic  on
1 July 1998 for a term of 4 years.

On 19 June 2001, the applicant's commander notified him  that  he  was
being discharged from the Air  Force  for  a  pattern  of  misconduct,
specifically  minor  disciplinary  infractions.   The  applicant   was
involved in numerous acts of  underage  drinking.   As  a  result,  he
received Article 15 punishment and an  Unfavorable  Information  File.
He also received several Letters of Counseling for failure  to  go  on
time, failure to go to appointed duty location, and failure to pay his
government credit card  balance.   Punishment  included  reduction  in
grade, forfeiture of pay and 30 days correctional custody.  He was not
entitled to a Board hearing.   In view of his continued misconduct and
failure to respond to corrective efforts, probation and rehabilitation
were not recommended.  He waived his rights to consult  legal  counsel
and did not submit statements.  The discharge case was reviewed by the
base legal office and  found  to  be  legally  sufficient  to  support
discharge.   The  discharge  authority  approved  his  separation  and
ordered a general  discharge  without  probation  and  rehabilitation.
Applicant was discharged on 6 July 2001.  He served 3 years and 5 days
on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.   Although  the  applicant  submitted  a
statement expressing remorse of his misconduct, he did not submit  any
new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the
discharge processing.   He  provided  no  other  facts  warranting  an
upgrade of the discharge.  The DPPRS evaluation is at attachment C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the  applicant  on
20 Dec 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 timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate
the existence of  an  error  or  injustice  to  warrant  changing  his
narrative reason for discharge.  After careful  consideration  of  the
available evidence, we found no indication that the actions  taken  to
effect his discharge were improper or contrary to  the  provisions  of
the governing regulations in effect at the time, or that  the  actions
taken against the applicant were based on factors other than  his  own
misconduct.  Therefore, 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 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 Docket  Number  02-03482
in Executive Session on 12 February 2003, under the provisions of  AFI
36-2603:

                 Mr. Albert F. Lowas, Jr., Panel Chair
                 Mr. William H. Anderson, Member
                 Mr. James W. Russell, III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Aug 02.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 4 Dec 02.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Dec 02.





      ALBERT F. LOWAS, JR.
      Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03763

    Original file (BC-2002-03763.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial and states based upon the documentation in the file the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03667

    Original file (BC-2002-03667.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority and the applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that her discharge should be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03518

    Original file (BC-2002-03518.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant was punished under Article 15, 19 Feb 82, for failure to report for duty; two Letters of Reprimand, dated 24 Aug 81 for failure to report to duty, and 13 Apr 83 for forgery with intent to defraud; and three Letters of Counseling, dated 19 Jul 81 for insufficient funds, 17 Jun 81 for substandard duty performance, and 29 May 81 for failure to follow proper leave procedures. AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02379

    Original file (BC-2003-02379.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 13 Apr 72, the discharge authority concurred with the recommendation and directed that he be discharged with a general discharge, without probation and rehabilitation. The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors in the discharge processing, and provided no facts warranting upgrade of his discharge. The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2001-03419

    Original file (BC-2001-03419.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-03419 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The separation code of KBK on his DD Form 214 and reflected in the personnel system be changed to MBK _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: After his separation from active duty on 28 January 2001, he...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03786

    Original file (BC-2002-03786.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03667 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. During her time in the Air Force, she took her duties seriously and endeavored to excel. AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02443

    Original file (BC-2003-02443.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02443 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His entry-level separation be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On 25 Jun 02, applicant received an uncharacterized entry-level separation, by reason of “Entry Level Performance and Conduct,” and was issued an RE code of 2C...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01902

    Original file (BC-2002-01902.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    As of this date, no response has been received by this office. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his discharge separation and reenlistment code should be changed. 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 that he has suffered either an error or an injustice.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201191

    Original file (0201191.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Her case was presented before an evaluation officer who recommended that she be discharged from the Air Force and provided a general discharge. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS reviewed applicant's request and recommends denial. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 May 02.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03431

    Original file (BC-2002-03431.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A Report of Individual Counseling dated 6 Nov 87 indicated the applicant had been advised he was being considered for discharge for failure to progress in the WMP. On 8 Feb 88, he was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend discharge for failure to progress in the WMP. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPRS provide their rationale for recommend denial.