RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03688
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was not represented at the time of discharge, and was told he could
request a change to his discharge at a later date.
The applicant did not submit any supporting documents. The
applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant contracted his enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 7 Aug
84 for a period of 4 years. He was promoted to the grade of airman (E-
2), effective and with a date of rank of 7 Feb 85. The applicant was
reduced to the grade of airman basic (E-1), with a date of rank (DOR)
of 12 Jul 85, pursuant to an Article 15.
On 24 Jul 85, the applicant received notification that he was being
recommended for discharge due to minor disciplinary infractions. The
reasons for this action follows: Four Letters of Reprimand (LOR),
dated 16 May 85, 4 Jun 85, 2 Jul 85 and 16 Jul 85, for writing checks
with insufficient funds; and, an Article 15, issued on 9 Jul 85, for
being absent without leave (AWOL), in violation of Article 86, UCMJ.
The Article 15 punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of
airman basic and a suspended forfeiture of pay.
On 26 Jul 85, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge
notification, that he consulted with military legal counsel and that
he waived his right to submit statements in his behalf. The discharge
authority approved the separation and ordered a general discharge
without probation and rehabilitation. On 1 Aug 85, the applicant
received a general discharge under the provisions of AFR 39-10
(misconduct - pattern of minor disciplinary infractions). He had
completed a total of 11 months and 24 days and was serving in the
grade of airman basic (E-1) at the time of discharge. Applicant’s
lost time is reflected as 2 Jul - 5 Jul 85.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied. DPPRS states
that, based upon the documentation in the file, they believe the
discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive
requirements of the discharge regulation. 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. The HQ AFPC/DPPRS evaluation
is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 20
Dec 02 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. The applicant did not provide
persuasive evidence showing the information in the discharge case file
was erroneous, his rights were violated, his commanders abused their
discretionary authority, or that his service warranted a better
characterization than the one he received. Additionally, the
applicant provided no documents to substantiate that he has maintained
the standards of good citizenship in the community since his
discharge; therefore, we are not inclined to exercise clemency in the
form of an upgrade to his discharge. In view of the above and 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 this application in
Executive Session on 13 Mar 03, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. David W. Mulgrew, Panel Chair
Mr. Billy C. Baxter, Member
Mr. Clarence D. Long III, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with
AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2002-03688.
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Nov 02.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 13 Dec 02.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Dec 02.
DAVID W. MULGREW
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03806
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03696
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03696 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The evaluation officer indicated that the applicant’s service did not appear to warrant an honorable discharge. He had completed a total of 6...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02800
Applicant's request to have his RE code changed was denied by the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) on 8 Aug 75. After reviewing the evidence of record, we are unpersuaded that the applicant’s records are in error or that he has been the victim of an injustice. Exhibit C. Letter, AFDRB Hearing Record, dated 8 Aug 75.
On 18 Jan 51, while serving in the grade of private first class, the applicant received an undesirable discharge, under the provisions of AFR 39-22 (conviction by civil authority). DPPRS indicated that the Air Force does not provide legal counsel in civil matters. The HQ AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and indicated that...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03470
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03470 (Case 2) INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. He had completed a total of 3 years, 3 months and 24 days and was serving in the grade of private first class at the time of discharge. With regards to the...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02572 INDEX CODE: 100.03 HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2X be changed so that he may reenlist. The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE recommends the application be denied. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03581
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS reviewed this application and found that based on the documentation in the file, they believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. However, based on the offense,...
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant responded, indicating that nothing can change the facts or the past. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his general discharge should be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00651 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. DPPRS stated that the applicant provided no facts warranting an upgrade of his discharge. Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 Mar 02, w/atch.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02636
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02636 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His discharge be upgraded. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: AFLSA/JAJM recommends the application be denied. While the applicant contends that he was immature at the time, he was almost 28 years old...