Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02680
Original file (BC-2003-02680.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  03-02680
                                        INDEX CODE:  110.02
                                        COUNSEL:  NONE
                                        HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her  bad  conduct  discharge  be  upgraded  to  general   (under   honorable
conditions) and her rank be reinstated to airman (E-3) or senior airman  (E-
4).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was advised that from three to eight  years  after  her  discharge,  she
could have her discharge upgraded to general.  It has been almost ten  years
since her discharge.  She  would  like  to  enlist  in  the  North  Carolina
National Guard as a supply clerk.

In support of her appeal, applicant  provides  a  personal  statement.   Her
complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 27 May 1987, the applicant enlisted in the  Regular  Air  Force  in  the
grade of airman basic (E-1) for a period of 4 years.

The applicant was tried by a general court-martial and convicted  of  three
specifications of making false official statements, three specifications of
fraud against the United States,  and  one  specification  of  violating  a
lawful general regulation.  The applicant was discharged with a bad conduct
discharge on 25 August 1993.  She had served five  years,  six  months  and
nine days on active duty.  The period 4 October 1991 through  9  July  1992
was time lost due to confinement.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to her discharge and  court-martial,
are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office  of  the  Air
Force at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFLSA/JAJM recommends the application be denied.  JAJM states that there  is
no legal basis for  upgrading  the  applicant's  discharge.   The  applicant
provides no compelling rationale to mitigate the  approved  dismissal  given
the circumstances of the case.  While clemency is an  option,  there  is  no
reason for the Board to exercise clemency in this case.   JAJM  opined  that
the applicant's bad conduct discharge accurately reflects the  character  of
her service.  The applicant has identified no error or injustice related  to
her prosecution or the sentence.

The AFLSA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAE  states  that  the  reenlistment  eligibility   (RE)   code   2B,
"separated  with  general  or  under-other-than-honorable  conditions,"   is
correct. Waivers of RE codes for  enlistment  are  considered  and  approved
based on the  needs  of  the  respective  military  service  and  recruiting
initiatives at the time of the enlistment inquiry.

The AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 9 January 2004, copies of the Air Force  evaluations  were  forwarded  to
the applicant for review and response.  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.   After  careful  consideration  of  the
applicant’s request  and  the  available  evidence  of  record,  we  see  no
evidence that would warrant an upgrade to her  characterization  of  service
based on clemency, particularly in view of the seriousness of  the  offenses
of which the applicant  stood  convicted.   Therefore,  we  agree  with  the
opinions  and  recommendations  of  the  Air  Force   offices   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.
Accordingly, we find no 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 probable 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  AFBCMR
Docket Number 03-02680 in Executive Session on 12 February 2004,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Panel Chair
      Ms. Barbara R. Murray, Member
      Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 Jan 02, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFLSA/JAJM, dated 28 Aug 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 24 Nov 03
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Jan 04.





                                   BRENDA L. ROMINE
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02855

    Original file (BC-2003-02855.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    If the Board cannot pardon him or chooses not to do so, he requests that his FBI record be corrected to reflect that he was only arrested once, not twice as his record reflects. On 6 Oct 00, the applicant requested a waiver of his “4F” RE code to allow him to reenlist in the Air Force. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE recommends denial of the applicant’s request to change his RE code.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03250

    Original file (BC-2003-03250.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 21 Jun 93, the applicant’s squadron commander notified her that he was considering whether to vacate the suspended punishment imposed on 15 Mar 93 for the alleged offenses of dereliction of duty and failure to obey a lawful general regulation. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLSA/JAJM recommends denial of the applicant’s requests. _______________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00167

    Original file (BC-2003-00167.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00167 INDEX CODE: 106.00, 110.02 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). On 28 July 1988, the Air Force Court of Military Review affirmed the findings of guilty and the sentence as approved by the convening...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02732

    Original file (BC-2003-02732.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    JAJM states that under 10 USC Section 1552(f), which amended the basic corrections board legislation, the Air Force Board for Corrections of Military Record’s (AFBCMR) ability to correct records related to courts-martial is limited. Specifically, Section 1552(f)(1) permits the correction of a record to reflect actions taken by reviewing authorities under the UCMJ. __________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01711

    Original file (BC-2002-01711.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was discharged on 12 Apr 98, he served 7 years, 1 month, and 1 day on active duty. The authorities involved all believed that a BCD was an appropriate consequence that accurately characterized his military service and his crimes. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | 0203833

    Original file (0203833.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to applicant’s court-martial and non-judicial punishments, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLSA/JAJM recommends the application be denied. While the applicant believes a bad conduct discharge was harsh based on the fact he was a first-time offender, we...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01763

    Original file (BC-2003-01763.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01763 INDEX CODES: 100.06, 131.06 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her rank be changed from airman basic to airman first class. The applicant has provided no evidence of a clear error or injustice related to the nonjudicial punishment action. The evidence of record reflects that the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03770

    Original file (BC-2003-03770.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 2 May 57, the US Air Force Board of Review affirmed the findings of guilty and the sentence. On 16 Sep 57, the convening authority mitigated the dishonorable discharge to a bad conduct discharge and he was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-18 with a bad conduct discharge in the grade of airman basic, with service characterized as under other than honorable conditions. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0003095

    Original file (0003095.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The complete evaluation is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: The applicant stated that at the time he was punished, he had a line number for promotion to E-5. Exhibit B. ROBERT W. ZOOK Panel Chair AFBCMR 00-03095 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02844

    Original file (BC-2002-02844.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant has provided no evidence of a clear error or injustice related to the nonjudicial punishment action. _________________________________________________________________ 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...