RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01131
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to
honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was young and in a bind with emotional and family problems.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic on
25 March 1968 for a term of 4 years. On 7 September 1970, the
applicant's commander notified him that he was recommending he be
discharged from the Air Force for frequent involvement of a
discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. The basis
for the commander’s recommendation was that on 28 January 1970, he
received an Article 15 for failure to repair; a Letter of Reprimand
(LOR) on 28 April 1970, for being disrespectful to a superior officer;
an Article 15 on 12 June 1970, for dereliction of duty; an Article 15
on 1 July 1970, for sleeping on duty; and a Special court-Martial
conviction on 14 August 1970, for leaving his appointed place of duty
and failure to go to his appointed place of duty. He acknowledged
receipt of the notification of discharge, and after consulting with
counsel applicant waived his right to a hearing before an
administrative discharge board and submitted a statement in his own
behalf. The discharge case was reviewed by the base legal office and
found to be legally sufficient to support discharge. The discharge
authority approved his separation and directed a general (under
honorable conditions) discharge. Applicant was separated on
3 November 1970, under the provisions of AFM 39-12, Separation for
Unsuitability, Misconduct, Resignation, or Request for Discharge for
the Good of the Service and Procedures for the Rehabilitation Program,
(frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with civil or military
authorities), and received a general (under honorable conditions)
discharge. The applicant served two years, seven months and nine days
on active duty.
Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Clarksburg, WV, provided a copy of an Investigation Report pertaining
to the applicant, which is at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial. Based on the documentation on file in
the master personnel records, that office believes the discharge was
consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the
discharge regulation and that the discharge was within the discretion
of the discharge authority. It indicates the applicant did not submit
any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in
the discharge processing. Nor did he provide any facts warranting a
change to his character of service.
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
23 April 2004, 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 timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of an error or injustice to warrant changing his
discharge to honorable. 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. We also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation
that the discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency. We have
considered applicant's overall quality of service and the events which
precipitated the discharge. Based on the evidence of record, we
cannot conclude that clemency is warranted. Applicant has not
provided sufficient information of post-service activities and
accomplishments for us to conclude he has overcome the behavioral
traits which caused the discharge.
_________________________________________________________________
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 Docket Number BC-2004-
01131 in Executive Session on 15 July 2004, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:
Mr. David W. Mulgrew, Panel Chair
Mr. James E. Short, Member
Gary G. Sauner, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 2 April 04.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 19 Apr 04.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Apr 04.
Exhibit E. FBI Report, undated.
DAVID W. MULGREW
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-00250
However, due to lack of documentation to support the reasons leading to his undesirable discharge, they would not be opposed to upgrading his discharge to a general (under honorable conditions) if a search of the FBI files does not reveal any convictions. Exhibit D. FBI Report, dated 19 May 04. DAVID W. MULGREW Panel Chair DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON DC [pic] Office Of The Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 2003-00250 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01083
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He honored his commitment to the Air Force by serving for 23 years and asks that the Air Force (AF) honor it’s commitment to his service by entitling him and his family to an active duty retirement. He was honorably discharged effective 23 October 1999 for completion of required active service after serving 24 years and 8 days. Counsel was notified by the Wing JA that the applicant and his military...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00315
He completed a total of 3 years, 9 months, and 3 days of active service and was serving in the grade of airman (E-2) at the time of discharge. The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He was doing well in the Air Force until he came home and found his wife in bed with another airman, whom she eventually married. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00933
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00933 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to a “1” category and his narrative reason for separation be changed to allow him to join the Air Force Reserves. On 29 April 1985, the applicant submitted an application to the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01419
On 17 March 1993, the applicant submitted an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (DRB) requesting his BCD be upgraded to honorable. After careful consideration of the available evidence, we found no indication that the actions taken to affect his discharge were improper or contrary to the provisions of the governing regulations in effect at the time, or that the actions taken against the applicant were based on factors other than his own misconduct. The Board is not...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02867
On 24 Feb 97, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request to have his discharge upgraded to honorable. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 15 Oct 04 for review and comment within 30 days. Based on his overall record of service, the contents of the FBI...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03806
On 11 Sep 80, applicant was notified of his commander's intent to vacate the suspended nonjudicial punishment because he again failed to report for duty at the appropriate time. The commander, on 14 Oct 80, determined that applicant was guilty of the offenses and imposed punishment consisting of forfeiture of $224.00 per month for two months, restriction to base for 45 days, and a reduction to the grade of airman basic, with a new date of rank of 14 Oct 80. He had completed a total of 2...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00873
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00873 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 17 February 1971, applicant submitted an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his discharge be upgraded to honorable....
On 18 Jan 51, while serving in the grade of private first class, the applicant received an undesirable discharge, under the provisions of AFR 39-22 (conviction by civil authority). DPPRS indicated that the Air Force does not provide legal counsel in civil matters. The HQ AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and indicated that...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03964
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03964 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A...