Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02017
Original file (BC-2003-02017.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02017
            INDEX CODE:  110.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her  bad  conduct  discharge  be  upgraded  to  general   (under   honorable
conditions).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her undesirable characterization of service was based on one  incident  with
extenuating  circumstances,  during  an  otherwise  uneventful   period   of
service.  Her discharge was the result of her reaction to an event  directed
towards her by her roommate that was not  addressed  by  her  dorm  manager.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant  enlisted  in  the  Regular  Air  Force  on  14  Aug  85  and  was
progressively promoted to the grade of airman first  class.   On  4 Dec  86,
she was convicted by a special court  martial  of  two  counts  of  wrongful
appropriation of currency  valued  at  about  $175  and  $120  from  another
airman, two counts of forgery, and one count of  being  disrespectful  to  a
superior noncommissioned officer.  Her sentence, adjudged and  affirmed  was
forfeiture of $400 pay per month for 3 months, reduction  to  the  grade  of
airman basic, confinement at hard labor for 3  months,  and  a  bad  conduct
discharge.  She was discharged on 24 Jul 87.  She served 1 year,  8  months,
and 27 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states that the  applicant's  discharge
was consistent with the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements  of  the
discharge  regulation  and  was  within  the  discretion  of  the  discharge
authority.  She did not submit any new evidence or identify  any  errors  in
her discharge  processing.   She  provided  no  other  facts  warranting  an
upgrade of the discharge.  The DPPRS 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  Jul
03 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office  has
received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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  that  would  warrant  an  upgrade  of  her
discharge  to  general.   Other  than  her  own  uncorroborated  assertions,
evidence has not been provided which would  lead  us  to  believe  that  the
action taken to affect her discharge from the  Air  Force  was  improper  or
contrary to the provisions of the governing regulations  in  effect  at  the
time; or, that the characterization of her  service  was  based  on  factors
other than her own misconduct.  Therefore, 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 she has  not  been  the
victim of an error or injustice.  We considered upgrading her  discharge  on
the basis  of  clemency;  however,  the  applicant  has  failed  to  provide
documentation  pertaining  to  her  post-service  activities.   Accordingly,
based on the available evidence of record, we find no compelling basis  upon
which 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-
02017 in Executive Session on 21 Aug 03, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
      Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Member
      Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 21 May 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 10 Jul 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jul 03.




                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02409

    Original file (BC-2003-02409.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02409 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors in her discharge processing. We see no evidence of an error in this case and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00866

    Original file (BC-2003-00866.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00866 INDEX CODE: 100.03, 100.06 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01825

    Original file (BC-2003-01825.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant was discharged from the Air Force on 25 Jun 96. All records indicate he was discharged in 25 Jun 96. Therefore, 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 | CY2004 | BC-2003-03997

    Original file (BC-2003-03997.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03997 INDEX NUMBER: 100.00, 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her narrative reason for separation and reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed. A copy of the AFDRB Hearing Record is attached at Exhibit C. The applicant’s records were administratively corrected on 12 Jul 00 to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01673

    Original file (BC-2003-01673.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01673 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). Applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge proceedings. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00146

    Original file (BC-2003-00146.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his request, the applicant submits personal statements and copies of her father’s DD Form 214 and Statement of Service. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E). After considering the evidence and testimony, the Board of Officers determined that the former member should be discharged with an undesirable discharge because of unfitness.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01150

    Original file (BC-2006-01150.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01150 INDEX CODE: 100.00, 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 19 OCTOBER 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03241

    Original file (BC-2002-03241.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 29 Aug 00, the applicant received notification that she was being recommended for discharge for erroneous enlistment. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicant’s submission, we are unpersuaded that the requested relief should be approved.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9900896

    Original file (9900896.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 7 Jun 90 in the grade of airman basic for a period of 4 years. In a legal review of the discharge case file, the Staff Judge Advocate recommended that the discharge authority direct the applicant be discharged with a general discharge. On 12 Nov 98, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request for upgrade of her...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02993

    Original file (BC-2003-02993.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02993 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be changed to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to...