Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01128
Original file (BC-2003-01128.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied


                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01128
            INDEX CODE:  110.01

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His separation date be changed from 1 Nov 89 to 12 Dec 89.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He served four full years in  the  Air  Force  at  Edwards  AFB.   His
enlistment was from 13 Dec 85 through 12 Dec 89.  At the  end  of  his
enlistment, he took 40 days terminal leave starting on 1 Nov 89.   The
personnel office counted  his  terminal  leave  against  his  time  in
service.  Although he was on terminal leave, he was  still  on  active
duty until 12 Dec 89.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a copy of a letter of
recommendation.

Applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 13 Dec 85 for a  period
of four years.

An AF Form 31, Airman's Request for Early Separation/Separation  Based
on Change in Service Obligation,  indicates  that  on  11 Jul 89,  the
applicant requested that he be separated from active duty on 1 Nov 89.
 His request was approved on 18 Jul 89.

Applicant was honorably discharged on 1 Nov 89 under the provisions of
AFR 39-10 (Miscellaneous Reasons).  He was credited with 7  years,  10
months, and 18 days of total active service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial noting that the  applicant  separated  1
month and 12 days prior to his expiration term of service (ETS).   Any
leave, whether regular or terminal, must be taken prior to a  date  of
separation  (DOS).   According  to  AFPC/DPPRS,  the   discharge   was
consistent with the procedural and  substantive  requirements  of  the
discharge regulation.  Additionally, the  separation  was  within  the
discretion of the discharge authority.  In their view,  the  applicant
did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors  or  injustices
that occurred in the discharge processing.

A complete copy of the 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 9 May
03 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 warranting any corrective  action.
The evidence of record indicates that the applicant requested and  was
approved for an early separation from active duty, effective 1 Nov 89,
which was prior to his ETS.  He contends  that  he  took  40  days  of
terminal starting on that date.  However, we note that terminal  leave
would have had to have been taken prior  to  his  DOS  of  1  Nov  89.
Furthermore, no evidence has been presented which  would  lead  us  to
believe that the applicant's early separation  from  active  duty  was
other than voluntary.  In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of
evidence of the contrary, we conclude that the applicant has failed to
sustain his burden of establishing that  he  has  suffered  either  an
error or an injustice.  Accordingly, the 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-
2003-01128 in Executive Session on 22 Jul 03, under the provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Gregory H. Petkoff, Panel Chair
      Ms. Carolyn B. Willis, Member
      Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 25 Mar 03, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 2 May 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 May 03.




                                   GREGORY H. PETKOFF
                                   Panel Chair



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01212

    Original file (BC-2003-01212.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01212 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. On 11 Jan 01, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered applicant's request for upgrade of his discharge to honorable and to change his reason for discharge. The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02860

    Original file (BC-2003-02860.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Recommendation Letter and Legal Review could not be found in the available records. As he has provided no facts warranting a change in his discharge, denial is recommended. After a thorough review of the evidence of record, we conclude the general discharge was appropriate given the applicant’s misconduct and that the RE code, which was driven by the discharge, is correct.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03508

    Original file (BC-2004-03508.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    ___________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 20 Jun 77, for a period of four years in the grade of airman basic. He recommended applicant be discharged from the Air Force with a general discharge and that he be considered for rehabilitation under the provisions of AFM 39-12, Chapter 4. Applicant was discharged on 11 Jul 80, in the grade of airman, under the provisions of AFM 39-12, Unsuitable-Apathy,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9703137

    Original file (9703137.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the evidence provided, they recommend denial of applicant's request. Facts of military justice action: On 24 Jul89, the applicant (then Sergwt) was notified of his commander’s intent to impose nonjudicial punishment upon him for: (1) failing to go to his appointed place of duty, i.e., the LOX service plant, at the time prescribed, on 15 3ul89, in violation of Article 86, UCMJ; and, (2) for being derelict in the performance of his duties on 15 Jul89, by failing to service the LOX...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00805

    Original file (BC-2003-00805.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Several post-trial clemency evaluations were submitted and, while some recommendations were mixed, the majority recommended the trial recommendations of clemency be accepted. On 5 Dec 96, the applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (DRB). In the attached statement, the applicant indicates he would appreciate an upgrade to a general discharge if honorable was not possible.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01937

    Original file (BC-2003-01937.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 03-01937 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. Applicant’s application is at Exhibit A. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provided a copy of an investigative report pertaining to the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02159

    Original file (BC-2004-02159.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant being an enlisted member at the time of his retirement was retired under the law that applies to Air Force enlisted members. While he did serve on active duty as a commissioned officer from 3 May 79 to 15 Aug 85, he was not entitled to retire as an officer because he had less than 10 years of active commissioned service as required by the applicable law. Applicant wants to know how someone can be retired as an officer and serve on active duty as an enlisted member.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03010

    Original file (BC-2004-03010.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-03010 (RECON of BC-1981-02511) INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, he requests his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded based on clemency. A summary of the evidence...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00495

    Original file (BC-2003-00495.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00495 INDEX CODES: 111.02, 131.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Officer Performance Report (OPR) rendered for the period 21 May 98 through 20 May 99 be declared void and removed from his records and replaced with the reaccomplished OPRs rendered for the periods 21 May 98 through 30...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-3688

    Original file (BC-2002-3688.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied. He provided no other...