Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03813
Original file (BC-2002-03813.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-03813

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was unjustly discharged from the Air Force.

In support of his application, he submits a copy of his DD  Form  293,
Applicant for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the
Armed Forces of the United States.

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
21 Feb 80.  He was discharged  under  the  provisions  of  AFR  39-12,
(Misconduct - Fraudulent Enlistment) from the Air Force on 20  Nov  81
with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.   He  served  4
months and 1  day  of  total  active  duty  service,  which  was  non-
creditable.

On  12  Oct  81,  the  applicant’s  commander  notified  him  he   was
recommending him for a discharge for fraudulent  entry  into  the  Air
Force.  The basis for the action was he fraudulently enlisted into the
Air Force by deliberately omitting the fact he had  previous  military
service in the Army from 26 May 79 to 26 Jul 79 and he also  signed  a
statement that he had never been  treated  for  mental  illness  in  a
hospital.  The applicant had  in  fact,  been  treated  for  a  mental
illness prior to and after entering duty in the Army.  The reason  for
his discharge from the Army was  due  to  physical  disability  (EPTS)
stemming from psychiatric problems.  He  intentionally  concealed  his
mental history and previous service to gain entry into the Air  Force.
Applicant submitted a waiver of board hearing conditional upon receipt
of an  honorable  discharge.   His  commander  and  legal  authorities
recommend disapproval.  The discharge  authority  agreed  and  offered
applicant an opportunity to submit  an  unconditional  waiver.   While
this discharge was processing, the member became  a  patient  at  USAF
Hospital Sheppard from 17 Feb  81  to  4  Nov  81.   A  medical  board
confirmed a diagnosis of paranoid  schizophrenic  on  12  May  81  and
recommended a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) and  VA  hospitalization
for 30 days.  The unit commander  advised  the  member  his  case  was
returned from the PEB recommending  an  administrative  discharge  for
fraudulent enlistment.  On 15 Sep 81, Sheppard Mental Health  Services
advised by letter, member  was  mentally  capable  to  understand  the
nature of  the  discharge  proceedings  and  member  admitted  he  had
concealed his previous mental illness and prior service.  On 4 Nov 81,
applicant unconditionally waived his rights to  submit  matters  to  a
board.  The package was reviewed by the base legal office and found to
be  legally  sufficient  to  support  the  discharge.   The  Discharge
Authority  approved  the  separation  and  ordered  a  general  (under
honorable conditions) discharge and applicant was discharged on 20 Nov
81

On 2 May 90, the Air Force Discharge Review Board reviewed and  denied
the applicant’s request for discharge upgrade.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial and states based upon the  documentation
in the file; they  believe  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.  The applicant 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.  He
has not filed a timely request.

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 10 Jan 03, 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,  it  is  in  the
interest of justice to excuse that failure to timely file.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of material error or injustice.  Applicant’s  contention
is at odds with the facts provided by his record.  After  deliberately
omitting the fact he had previous military service in  the  Army,  the
applicant was discharged with a general  (under  honorable  condition)
discharge.   It  appears  that  the  responsible   officials   applied
appropriate standards in effecting the discharge,  and  the  applicant
has not provided persuasive evidence that pertinent  regulations  were
violated or that he was not afforded all the rights to  which  he  was
entitled.  The  applicant  has  failed  to  sustain  his   burden   of
demonstrating he suffered either an  error  or  an  injustice  and  we
conclude that no basis exist to grant favorable action on his request.

_________________________________________________________________

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  02-03813
in Executive Session on 12 March 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

            Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
            Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Member
            Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 Nov 02, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, 20 Dec 02.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Jan 03.





      MICHEAL K. GALLOGLY
      Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2006-02989

    Original file (BC-2006-02989.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The basis for the commander’s recommendation was that he signed an enlistment document stating he had no previous military service on 21 Feb 80, when he had served on active duty in the United States Army from 26 Mar 79 to 26 Jul 79, and he signed an enlistment document indicating he had never been treated for mental illness and had never been a patient in any type of hospital. On 1 May 90, the Air Force Discharge Review Board denied the applicant request to upgrade his general (under...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200280

    Original file (0200280.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The reasons the applicant believes the records to be in error or unjust and the evidence submitted in support of the appeal are at Exhibit A. On 7 Jan 80, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for being in a fight on 10 Dec 79 at Peterson AFB, CO. His APRs reflect superior performance; however, despite drug rehabilitation and an Article 15 for marijuana possession, the applicant’s...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2001-03652

    Original file (BC-2001-03652.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to the Board’s request for clarification regarding whether a change of the narrative reason for discharge currently listed as personality disorder is justified, the AFBCMR Medical Consultant provided the following advisory...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02932

    Original file (BC-2002-02932.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A 4 August 2000 entry in his medical records reveals that the applicant was hospitalized for cellulitis. Based on the evidence provided they recommend the requested relief be denied (Exhibit D). _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03299

    Original file (BC-2002-03299.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 27 November 2002 for review and comment within 30 days. Based on the fact that the applicant did not want to take the leave, we recommend his records be corrected to the extent indicated below. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00071

    Original file (BC-2005-00071.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 11 Mar 82, the Airman Performance Report (APR) for the period 29 Jan 81 through 28 Jan 82, was referred to the applicant. Time lost for the following periods: 28-31 Oct 81, 15-16 Dec 81, 29 Jan- 1 Feb 82, 16-21 Feb 82, and 20 May 82-23 Sep 82. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF EVALUATION: A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 21 Jan 05 for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02798

    Original file (BC-2002-02798.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02798 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for discharge be changed to a medical condition existing prior to service and his uncharacterized discharge be changed to honorable. The Medical Consultant states that the applicant had a history of ADHD since...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0102138

    Original file (0102138.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02138 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His entry level discharge be changed to an honorable discharge with medical conditions. The BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied. DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03277

    Original file (BC-2002-03277.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03277 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. However, he did serve honorably while in the Air Force. In support of his request, applicant provided a copy of his discharge evaluation officer's...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03806

    Original file (BC-2002-03806.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 11 Sep 80, applicant was notified of his commander's intent to vacate the suspended nonjudicial punishment because he again failed to report for duty at the appropriate time. The commander, on 14 Oct 80, determined that applicant was guilty of the offenses and imposed punishment consisting of forfeiture of $224.00 per month for two months, restriction to base for 45 days, and a reduction to the grade of airman basic, with a new date of rank of 14 Oct 80. He had completed a total of 2...