Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00898
Original file (BC-2003-00898.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00898
            INDEX CODE:

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  Under  Other  Than  Honorable  Conditions  (UOTHC)  discharge  be
upgraded to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His discharge does not allow him to make claim  against  his  military
service rendered; he had no time lost; he attended a hearing, and that
he was granted his Veteran’s Administration (VA) benefits.

His submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force  on  26  March  1971.   He
attained the grade of Airman (Amn/E-2) with a date  of  rank  of    28
April 1971.

On 27 October 1971, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR)
for unauthorized use of  government-leased  telephone  lines.   On  19
November 1971, he received an Article  15  for  failure  to  obey  two
lawful orders.  On 5 May 1972, he  received  an  LOR  for  failure  to
appear for two dental appointments.  On 7 June 1972,  he  received  an
Article 15 for failure to go to  appointed  place  of  duty  where  he
received a suspended reduction to AB.  On 9 August 1972,  he  received
an LOR for speeding, and on 23 August 1972, he received an Article  15
for theft whereby the earlier suspended reduction in grade to  AB  was
vacated.

The applicant’s commander notified him on 28 September  1972  that  he
was recommending the applicant meet an officer discharge review  board
for continuous misconduct and frequent involvement of a  discreditable
nature with military authorities.  Applicant appeared before the Board
on 29 September 1972.  The Board recommended an undesirable  discharge
with  no  Probation  and  Rehabilitation  (P&R)  that  the   discharge
authority approved on   25 October 1972.  Applicant  was  subsequently
discharged with an UOTHC discharge on 27 October 1972 after serving  1
year, 7 months and 27 days.  He was discharged as an AB.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial noting that the applicant provided no new
evidence or identify any errors or injustices in the processing of his
discharge.  DPPRS states that the discharge was  consistent  with  the
procedural and substantive requirements of  the  discharge  regulation
and that it was within the discretion of the discharge authority.

DPPRS’s 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
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 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 find no  impropriety  in  the
characterization  of   applicant's   discharge.    It   appears   that
responsible officials applied appropriate standards in  effecting  the
separation, and we do not  find  persuasive  evidence  that  pertinent
regulations were violated or that applicant was not afforded  all  the
rights to which entitled at  the  time  of  discharge.   We  conclude,
therefore,  that   the   discharge   proceedings   were   proper   and
characterization of the discharge  was  appropriate  to  the  existing
circumstances.

4.    Because the applicant has provided no  documentation  concerning
post-service conduct, the Board finds nothing to warrant an upgrade of
his discharge on the basis of clemency.  However,  should  he  provide
statements from community leaders and acquaintances attesting  to  his
good character and reputation and other evidence of  successful  post-
service rehabilitation, this Board will reconsider this case based  on
the new evidence.  We cannot, however, recommend approval based on the
current evidence of record.

_________________________________________________________________

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-
2003-00898 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 10 Mar 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 10 Apr 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Apr 03.




                                   ROBERT S. BOYD
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01032

    Original file (BC-2003-01032.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    His emotional volatility, alcohol and substance abuse, and immaturity really clouded his judgment. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. _________________________________________________________________ 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;...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00957

    Original file (BC-2003-00957.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial noting that the applicant did not identify any errors or injustices during the processing of his discharge. We conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03899

    Original file (BC-2002-03899.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03899 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general, under honorable conditions, discharge be upgraded to honorable. It appears that responsible officials applied appropriate standards in effecting the separation, and we do not find persuasive evidence that...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02523

    Original file (BC-2003-02523.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02523 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable and he receive financial benefits for medical and housing. On 18 May 1987, the applicant's commander recommended he be discharged for misconduct. The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03705

    Original file (BC-2002-03705.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we are not persuaded that the actions taken against him were improper, contrary to the provisions of the governing regulations in effect at the time, or based on factors other than his own misconduct. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC- 2002-03705 in Executive Session on 23 April 2003, under the provisions of AFI...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00431

    Original file (BC-2003-00431.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    For these actions, he received an LOR, which was placed in his existing UIF. On 19 Dec 01, the applicant was discharged under provisions of AFI 36-3208 by reason of misconduct, with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). On 15 Nov 02, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) found that neither evidence of record, nor that provided by the applicant, substantiated an inequity or impropriety which would justify a change in the discharge (see AFDRB Hearing Record...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00140

    Original file (BC-2004-00140.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of their separation. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00912

    Original file (BC-2003-00912.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00912 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2B, “Separated with a general or under-other-than-honorable-conditions (UOTHC) discharge,” be changed. For these actions, she received an LOR, which was placed in her existing UIF. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03094

    Original file (BC-2002-03094.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    e. The applicant, on 10 December 1996, reported for duty without any stripes sewn on his uniform, for this misconduct the applicant was counseled. The discharge authority approved the discharge and the applicant was discharged on 30 September 1997, in the grade of airman with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge, in accordance with AFI 36-3208 for Minor Disciplinary Infractions. The applicant submitted a request to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to have his under...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03094

    Original file (BC-2002-03094.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    e. The applicant, on 10 December 1996, reported for duty without any stripes sewn on his uniform, for this misconduct the applicant was counseled. The discharge authority approved the discharge and the applicant was discharged on 30 September 1997, in the grade of airman with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge, in accordance with AFI 36-3208 for Minor Disciplinary Infractions. The applicant submitted a request to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to have his under...