Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02949
Original file (BC-2002-02949.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02949
            INDEX CODE:  110.01
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  general  (under  honorable  conditions)  discharge   be   upgraded   to
honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The applicant makes no contentions.  His complete submission 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 C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states that the  applicant  received  a
Letter of Reprimand for failure to properly sign out on  leave,  an  Article
15 for being Absent Without Leave (AWOL) from 1 - 5 Jun 72,  an  Article  15
for damage to Government property and failure to go, and an Article  15  for
being AWOL from 25 - 28 Nov 72.  He was administratively  discharged  on  26
Dec 72 under the provisions of AFR 39-12 and received a  general  discharge.
The  discharge  was  consistent  with   the   procedural   and   substantive
requirements of the discharge regulation and was within  the  discretion  of
the discharge authority.  The applicant did not submit any new  evidence  or
identify  any  errors  or  injustices  that  occurred   in   the   discharge
processing.  The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on  8  Nov
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 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 see no evidence of  an  error  in  this
case and after a thorough review of  the  evidence  of  record,  we  do  not
believe he has been the victim on an injustice.  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.   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  02-02949  in
Executive Session on 26 Mar 03, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Vice Chair
      Mr. James W. Russell III, Member
      Mrs. Carolyn J. Watkins-Taylor, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 Oct 02.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 29 Oct 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Nov 02.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Vice Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02662

    Original file (BC-2002-02662.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The 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 and D. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR states that the applicant was informed that there was no indication in his record that he was awarded the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03103

    Original file (BC-2002-03103.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 14 Feb 03 for review and comment within 30 days. After careful consideration of the applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we see no evidence of an error or injustice that would warrant a change in his RE code. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03103

    Original file (BC-2002-03103.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 14 Feb 03 for review and comment within 30 days. After careful consideration of the applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we see no evidence of an error or injustice that would warrant a change in his RE code. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | 0202511

    Original file (0202511.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02511 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C be changed so he may enlist in the Kansas Air National Guard. The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE states that the applicant separated 21 November 1995 after serving 2 months and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02510

    Original file (BC-2002-02510.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02510 INDEX CODE: 100.03, 100.06 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed from 2C to 1J so that he may serve in the Air National Guard. He was discharged on 21 Jul 00 and issued an RE code of "2C.". ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0103040

    Original file (0103040.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The commander told him he could, but that he would have to receive and undesirable discharge; however, after his discharge he could request the Veterans Administration (VA) upgrade his discharge to general. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicant’s complete submission, we find no evidence of error or injustice. Exhibit B.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | 0203230

    Original file (0203230.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 3 March 1954, the Air Force Discharge Review Board denied his request for a discharge upgrade. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to his discharge are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS states that the applicant was facing a possible court-martial for submitting a false travel claim. After noting the comments provided by the Air...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02916

    Original file (BC-2002-02916.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant was discharged from the Air Force on 6 Mar 02. The consultant states that a lab slip dated 27 Mar 02 is in her medical records indicating a positive pregnancy test. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0101410

    Original file (0101410.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s complete response is attached at Exhibit F. On 17 Aug 01, a copy of the FBI report and a request to provide additional evidence pertaining to his post-service activities was sent to the applicant (Exhibit G). On 23 Aug 01, applicant provided a statement explaining his activities since leaving the service. Based on a review of the limited post- service evidence provided and in view of the contents of the FBI Identification Record, we are not persuaded that an upgrade of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201736

    Original file (0201736.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. ...