RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03982
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general, under honorable conditions, discharge be upgraded to
honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His discharge was improper because it was based on him not completing
technical training school. He would like to reenter the military to
pursue a career in security police.
In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided a copy of his
discharge certificate, discharge order, and his NGB Form 22, National
Guard Bureau Report of Separation and Record of Service.
His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Rhode Island Air National Guard (RI ANG)
on 26 January 1999 as an Airman First Class (A1C/E-3). He completed
Basic Military Training (BMT) and was scheduled for technical training
school on 13 January 2000.
On 17 February 2000, the applicant received notification that he was
being recommended for discharge due to his refusal to attend technical
school. He received a general, under honorable conditions, discharge
under the provisions of AFI 36-3209, Failure to Complete Inactive Duty
Training (IADT) – Tech School. He acknowledged his right to legal
counsel but did not exercise it. He had served a total of 1 year, 8
months and 20 days and was serving in the grade of A1C at the time of
discharge.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
ANG/DPPI recommends denial. DPPI notes that the applicant submitted a
letter of resignation requesting a discharge from the RI ANG for
several reasons including his not wanting to serve in the military.
DPPI states that the applicant was well aware of the requirement to
attend technical school and was also aware of the consequences of not
meeting that requirement.
ANG/DPPI’s complete evaluation, with discharge documentation attached,
is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on
18 April 2003 for review and comment within 30 days. 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 timely filed.
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 are of the opinion that no evidence has been presented to
show that the applicant’s was in error or unjust. Therefore, we agree
with the opinion and recommendation of the Air National Guard 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2002-03982 in Executive Session on 5 June 2003, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Robert S. Boyd, Panel Chair
Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Member
Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 Dec 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, ANG/DPPI, dated 7 Apr 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Apr 03
ROBERT S. BOYD
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00205
He enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 12 January 1998 in the grade of SrA. 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 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.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00003
In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided a letter to the Board. He received a general, under honorable conditions, discharge from the MS ANG for non-participation on 30 October 1993 after 1 year, 9 months and 21 days of service. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ANG/DPPI reviewed this application and recommended denial.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00326
His character of service was Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) and his reenlistment eligibility was recorded as “Ineligible.” _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ANG/DPPI recommends denial. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice warranting a change in his discharge and reenlisment eligibility. Vaughn E. Schlunz Panel Chair DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02805
DOF’s complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 23 April 2004 for review and comment within 30 days. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04040
ANG/DPPI’s evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant’s vice commander (WADS/CV) responded on behalf of the applicant and notes that the ANG/DPPI evaluation, while factually correct, does not address circumstantial process shortfalls particular to the applicant’s case. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-00997
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00997 INDEX CODE: 110.03 COUNSEL: ZIMMERMAN & LAVIN HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be reinstated in the Texas Air National Guard (TXANG) Active Guard/Reserve (AGR) program, effective 15 April 2002, with all pay that was lost (less her subsequent earnings as a civil service technician) or in the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00492
Otherwise, members have up to 3 FY’s to use accrued SLA. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that 2.5 days of leave were added to his leave account commencing 2 October 2002. ROBERT S. BOYD Panel Chair DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON DC [pic] Office Of The Assistant Secretary BC-2003-00492 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03770
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His dental work, done while on active duty was not completed. DPPI notes that the -- ANG maintains that the applicant was a “no show” for at least four of his dental appointments during his active duty tour. 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 National Guard office of primary...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00407
Other pertinent facts are contained in the letter prepared by the Air Force at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ANG/DPPI recommended relief be denied. Because DFAS center accounts for the use of SLA by using the “last leave earned is the first leave used”, the applicant lost 3.5 days because he failed to use them by the end of September 2002. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01485
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-1485 INDEX CODE: 110.02, 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His discharge be upgraded to honorable, his prior grade and rank be reinstated, and his reenlistment eligibility be changed to “Eligible.” _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS...