RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02605
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her general discharge be upgraded to honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She was immature at the time of the offense. She went AWOL with her
then boyfriend, yet his punishment was less severe than the punishment
she received.
In support of her request, the applicant submits copies of her DD Form
214, an undated letter of introduction, certificates of training,
recognition and appreciation. The applicant’s complete submission,
with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant contracted her enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 5 Jul
95.
On 29 Nov 95, applicant was tried before a special court-martial at
Keesler AFB, MS. She was charged with stealing a vehicle, in
violation of Article 121; desertion, in violation of Article 85;
missing movement (her flight to Korea), in violation of Article 87;
and being absent without leave (AWOL), in violation of Article 86.
The applicant was represented by military defense counsel. Consistent
with her pleas, the applicant was found guilty of stealing the
vehicle, missing a flight movement and absenting herself without
authority. The desertion charge was dismissed following her plea of
guilty to the aforementioned offenses. She was sentenced to a bad
conduct discharge. By action, dated 14 Nov 96, the Secretary of the
Air Force substituted a general discharge for the bad conduct
discharge.
On 17 Dec 96, the applicant received a general discharge under the
provisions of General Court Martial Order No. 7 (court martial). She
had completed a total of 1 year, 5 months and 13 days (dates of lost
time: 23 Oct - 28 Nov 95) and was serving in the grade of airman
basic (E-1) at the time of discharge.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFLSA/JAJM recommends the application be denied. JAJM stated that on
13 Jun 96, the Air Force Court of Military Review (AFCMR) affirmed the
court-martial findings and sentence of a bad conduct discharge. The
AFCMR’s decision was affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals
for the Armed Forces. However, by action dated 14 Nov 96, the
Secretary of the Air Force substituted a general discharge for the bad
conduct discharge. JAJM indicated that the applicant did not mention
that she did not receive a period of confinement or that her
characterization of service was upgraded. JAJM stated that clemency
should only be granted when the applicant has demonstrated that the
degree of punishment in relation to the crime was a clear injustice.
The applicant has made no such showing. Despite having pled guilty to
a number of crimes that initially resulted in a punitive discharge
from the service, she is now asking for additional relief. The
applicant has already received an upgrade to her characterization of
service. The AFLSA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 6
December 2002 for review and response. As of this date, no response
has been received by this office (Exhibit D).
_________________________________________________________________
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. 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
office (AFLSA/JAJM) and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for
our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain her burden that
she has suffered either an error or an injustice. Although
applicant’s age and immaturity may have been contributing factors to
her lack of good judgment, they do not, in our opinion, excuse her
misconduct or justify further upgrade of the discharge. In view of
the above and absent 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 this application in
Executive Session on 30 January 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Edward C. Koenig III, Panel Chair
Ms. Martha Maust, Member
Mr. John E. Pettit, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with
AFBCMR Docket Number 02-02605.
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Sep 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFLSA/JAJM, dated 20 Nov 02.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Dec 02.
EDWARD C. KOENIG III
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03090
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03090 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLSA/JAJM states an application must be filed within three years after...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-00070
The complete evaluation is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 30 Aug 02 for review and comment within 30 days. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01711
The applicant was discharged on 12 Apr 98, he served 7 years, 1 month, and 1 day on active duty. The authorities involved all believed that a BCD was an appropriate consequence that accurately characterized his military service and his crimes. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01447 INDEX CODE: 110.00 . _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: After serving 4 years and 1 month in the United States Navy, he contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 22 Feb 82. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01953 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her bad conduct discharge be upgraded to general under honorable conditions and that her records list “conspiracy” as a misdemeanor and not a federal crime. On 23 April 1996, the Air Force Discharge Review Board reviewed and returned...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02774
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02774 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her late husbands records be corrected to remove his bad conduct discharge (BCD). Furthermore, it appears that on 30 Jul 96 the former members mother was provided a written response to her letter from SAF/LLI which explained both the relief...
On 3 Mar 97, the discharge authority approved the discharge action and directed that the applicant be furnished a UOTHC discharge. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Military Justice Division, AFLSA/JAJM, reviewed this application and concluded that the administrative relief of removal of the 16 Aug 96 record of the nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 from the applicant’s records was not warranted. A complete copy of the DPPRS...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-03208 INDEX CODE: COUNSEL: MR. ALAN K. HAHN HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Board set aside two Article 15 punishments imposed upon him on 11 Dec 95 and 12 Sep 96; set aside the Secretary of the Air Force’s (SAF) decision to retire him in the grade of major; and, that he be retired in the grade of...
However, if the Board voids the Article 15 as requested or removes the reduction as part of the punishment, the effective date and date of rank would revert to the original date of 1 July 1992. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 21 December 1998, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant for review and response within 30 days. ...
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force. After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant...