RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01413
INDEX CODE: 106.00, 110.02
COUNSEL:
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He believes his trial was impartial and discriminating. His counsel
failed to report that he was suffering from alcoholism, which he
believes was a crucial part of his case.
In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement, DD
Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty,
Training Certificates, Robins Rev-Up Newspaper Article, 5 Character
Reference Letters, 3 Achievement Certificates, 10 Year Driving Record
and a Personal Resume.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant entered into the Air Force on 30 November 1978, and was
progressively promoted to the grade of sergeant.
He was tried at a special court-martial on 6 August 1982. He was
charged with one specification of stealing $30.00, the property of
another individual, in violation of Article 121, UCMJ. He pled guilty
to the charge and specification, and was found guilty. The military
judge sentenced him to a BCD and reduction to the grade of E-1. On 17
September 1982, the convening authority approved the sentence as
adjudged and the court martial was affirmed on 4 February 1983.
The applicant was separated from the Air Force on 4 February 1983,
under special court martial Order #10 with a BCD. He served 4 years,
2 months, and 6 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 F.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial. Based upon the documentation on file in
the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the
procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.
The discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.
Applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or
injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. He provided no
facts warranting an upgrade in 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 and
his counsel on 1 July 04, for review and comment within 30 days. As
of this date, this office has received no response.
On 9 August 2004, a copy of the FBI Report was forwarded to the
applicant for review and response within 15 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 an error or injustice. 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. 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.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, 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 Docket Number BC-2004-
01413 in Executive Session on 14 September 2004, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Panel Chair
Mr. James W. Russell III, Member
Mr. John B. Hennessey, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Jan 04.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 23 Jun 04.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Jul 04.
Exhibit E. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 9 Aug 04.
Exhibit F. Letter, FBI Report, dated 26 Jul 04.
OLGA M. CRERAR
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00479
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00479 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her under honorable conditions (general) discharged be upgraded to honorable. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00673
Pursuant to the Board's request, the FBI, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLSA/JAJM indicated that under 10 USC 1552(f), the AFBCMR’s ability to correct records related to courts-martial is limited. We do not believe an honorable discharge is warranted due to the limited documentation provided by the applicant regarding his activities since his...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01354
The applicant submitted an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (DRB) requesting his general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. The DPPPE evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...
The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from his available military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. In response to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) provided a copy of an investigative report pertaining to the applicant (see Exhibit G). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed applicant’s request and...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03730
The applicant did not submit any new evidence nor provide facts warranting an upgrade of his discharge. However, as of this date, this office has received no response. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicant’s complete submission, we are not persuaded that a change to his characterization of service is warranted.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00254
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS states the applicant has not submitted any evidence nor identified any errors or injustices that occurred in the processing of his discharge. Based on the information and evidence provided they recommend the request be denied (Exhibit D). ...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01496
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided extracts from his available military personnel records. The basis of the applicant's request for relief was insufficient to warrant setting aside the Article 15 action, and did not demonstrate an equitable basis for relief. By letter, dated 19 Aug 03, the Board's staff requested that the applicant provide information pertaining to his activities since leaving the service.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00278
Furthermore, in view of the repeated misconduct during his short period of service that resulted in his court-martial actions and subsequent discharge and the contents of the FBI Report of Investigation, we are not persuaded that an upgrade of the characterization of the applicant’s service on the basis of clemency is warranted. Therefore, based on the available evidence of record, the applicant’s request for upgrade of his discharge is not favorably considered. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03215
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2003-03215 INDEX CODE: 131.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. Furthermore, if the request were granted there is no discharge form to correct, the applicant would only receive a letter from the Board stating he received an honorable...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02163
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02163 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. However, he has provided no evidence showing his discharge was improper or contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation at the time it was...