RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02379
INDEX CODE: 110.0
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to
honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was court-martialed and acquitted, after which he was discharged. His
discharge was unfair and unjust.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 12 May 70. He was
progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class having assumed
that grade effective and with a date of rank of 6 Dec 70. On 17 Mar 72,
applicant was notified by his commander that he was recommending that he be
discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-12
(unsuitability – Apathy and Defective Attitude). The specific reasons for
this action were that the applicant received an Article 15 on 3 Aug 71, for
dereliction of his duties; he received an Article 15 on 2 Nov 71, for
writing seven bad checks to the Airmen’s Open Mess; he received an Article
15 on 3 Jan 72, for failure to report to duty; and he received an Article
15 on 12 Jan 72, for failure to go at the prescribed time to his place of
duty on three occasions. On 23 Mar 72, applicant was interviewed by an
investigating officer who recommended retention because the applicant
indicated that he wanted to remain in the Air Force and he planned to
improve his attitude. However, when the applicant failed to show for
scheduled interviews, he decided not to recommend retention because the
applicant demonstrated a lack of sincerity on his part. On 13 Apr 72, the
discharge authority concurred with the recommendation and directed that he
be discharged with a general discharge, without probation and
rehabilitation. On 18 Apr 72, applicant was tried by a special court-
martial for being absent without leave but was found not guilty. The staff
judge advocate reviewed the package and found the case legally sufficient.
Applicant was discharged on 7 Jun 72. He served 2 years and 21 days on
active duty.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial. DPPRS states that the discharge was
consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the
discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge
authority. The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any
errors in the discharge processing, and provided no facts warranting
upgrade of his 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 8 Aug
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. We are not persuaded by the evidence
presented that the actions taken to affect his discharge from the Air Force
were improper, contrary to the provisions of the governing regulations, or
that he was denied rights to which he was entitled. Further, we see no
evidence of an error or injustice that would warrant a change in the
characterization of his service. In our opinion, given the multiplicity of
the offenses he committed against the good order and discipline of the
service, and the short period of time in which he served, the decision to
discharge him and the characterization of his discharge were proper and in
compliance with the appropriate directives. Therefore, based on the
available evidence of record, we find no basis upon which to favorably
consider 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-
02379 in Executive Session on 17 Sep 03, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Albert F. Lowas, Jr., Panel Chair
Mr. Michael Maglio, Member
Ms. Dorothy P. Loeb, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Jul 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 4 Aug 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Aug 03.
ALBERT F. LOWAS, JR.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03518
Applicant was punished under Article 15, 19 Feb 82, for failure to report for duty; two Letters of Reprimand, dated 24 Aug 81 for failure to report to duty, and 13 Apr 83 for forgery with intent to defraud; and three Letters of Counseling, dated 19 Jul 81 for insufficient funds, 17 Jun 81 for substandard duty performance, and 29 May 81 for failure to follow proper leave procedures. AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is at Exhibit...
--He received a letter of counseling on 10 Jan 77 for not reporting for duty. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his UOTHC discharge should be upgraded to honorable or general. We note the applicant received three Article 15s, several LORs and counseling sessions, and substance abuse rehabilitation to no avail.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03431
A Report of Individual Counseling dated 6 Nov 87 indicated the applicant had been advised he was being considered for discharge for failure to progress in the WMP. On 8 Feb 88, he was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend discharge for failure to progress in the WMP. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPRS provide their rationale for recommend denial.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00264
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00264 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. - On 5 May 72, applicant received notification of his commander's intent to impose an Article 15 for being AWOL from 24 Apr - 1 May 72, in violation of Article 86, UCMJ....
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03763
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial and states based upon the documentation in the file the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02158
The applicant did not report for duty on 5 Feb 75. One reference is from his wife and the other appears to be from a friend. Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 14 Aug 03, w/atch.
Her case was presented before an evaluation officer who recommended that she be discharged from the Air Force and provided a general discharge. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS reviewed applicant's request and recommends denial. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 May 02.
He received an LOR on 7 Apr 82 for failing to report for duty on 3 April 82. On 17 May 83, after consulting with counsel, the applicant requested discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his UOTHC discharge should be upgraded to honorable or general.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02091
In the recommendation for discharge, the commander noted the psychiatrist and Social Actions Officer reported the applicant was a drug abuser who had reported use of marijuana, mescaline, and LSD. At the time of his mental health evaluation, the applicant was diagnosed with a personality disorder and was determined to know right from wrong and possess the capacity to conform his behavior to law and Air Force regulations. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 17 Nov 03.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01869
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01869 INDEX CODE: 110.10 COUNSEL: The Salvation Army HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS states that there is no documentation in the...