RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03667
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to
honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She wants to serve her country by joining the Air Force Reserve and
has been advised that her current DD Form 214 character of service
entry of general (under honorable conditions) is a firm obstacle to
her enlistment. It has been more than twenty years since she was
discharged and her rationale for not seeking correction earlier is
simply that she was totally involved with raising her children and had
no driving reason to seek the change.
In support of her application, she submits a personal statement.
Applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic on
28 Jan 80. She was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-12,
(Unsuitable - Apathy, Defective Attitude) from the Air Force on 11 Jun
81 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. She served
1 year, 4 months and 24 days of total active duty service.
On 22 May 81, the applicant’s commander notified her he was
recommending her for administrative discharge for apathy and defective
attitude with a general discharge. Basis for the action: Two Articles
15, 3 Jul 80 and 7 May 81, for dereliction of duty and failure to go
to appointed duty on time. In addition to the Articles 15, she was
counseled on several different occasions for failure to go to
appointed duty on time and failure to wear proper rank insignia on her
uniform. Applicant stated her numerous problems were related to her
inability to be with her husband. An Evaluation Officer was appointed
to investigate and he concluded that the applicant showed a lack of
initiative towards her responsibilities, as evidenced by her
nonjudicial punishments and failed to accept the consequences of being
married to another service member who was not stationed with her. He
recommended discharge without probation and rehabilitation (P&R).
Applicant was advised of her rights to submit rebuttal and statements;
however, she stated she did not wish to do either. The base legal
office reviewed the case, found it legally sufficient to support the
discharge, and recommended a general discharge without P&R. The
Discharge Authority approved the discharge and ordered a general
discharge without P&R.
_________________________________________________________________
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. 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. She provided
no other facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge.
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 the
applicant on 20 Dec 02, for review and comment. 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, the Board excused
the failure to timely file.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice. 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 applicant has
not established by her submission that her commander abused his
discretionary authority, and since we find no abuse of that authority,
there is no compelling reason to overturn the commander’s decision.
We agree with the opinions and recommendation of the Air Force and
adopt their rationale as the basis for our decision that the applicant
has failed to sustain her burden of having suffered either an error or
an injustice. Therefore, in absence of evidence to the contrary, we
find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of a 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 02-03667
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 7 Nov 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 13 Dec 02.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Dec 02.
ALBERT F. LOWAS, JR
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03518
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-2002-03763
_________________________________________________________________ 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...
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-2002-03786
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 | CY2005 | BC-2005-02695
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02695 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 28 FEB 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). ...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02379
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...
He received an LOR on 7 Apr 82 for failing to report for duty on 3 April 82. On 17 May 83, after consulting with counsel, the applicant requested discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his UOTHC discharge should be upgraded to honorable or general.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01089 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The narrative reason for her discharge from the Air Force be changed from "Personality Disorder" to "Pregnancy/Depression." Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRSP, dated 24 May 02. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 May 02.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00755
An evaluation officer reviewed the applicants case and recommended she be discharged from the Air Force and furnished a general discharge for an apathetic and defective attitude only after being considered for rehabilitation. On 27 Mar 81, the applicant was furnished a general (under honorable conditions) discharge and was credited with 1 year and 16 days of total active service. On 28 Apr 82, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered the applicants request to upgrade her...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03482
In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement. The discharge case was reviewed by the base legal office and found to be legally sufficient to support discharge. _________________________________________________________________ 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,...