RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2004-01530
INDEX CODE 106.00
COUNSEL: None
HEARING DESIRED: No
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His 2003 Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to general.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
A job offer in the security field was retracted due to the BCD. The
job would help him get back on his feet and help his future. He would
like a second chance to help and protect others.
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 29 Dec 98 and was
assigned to the 1st Component Repair Squadron at Langley AFB, VA, as a
jet engine apprentice.
On 28 Aug 00, the applicant received a referral Airman Performance
Report (APR) for the period 29 Dec 98 through 28 Aug 00. He was given
an overall rating of “1” (Not Recommended for Promotion) for failing
to meet minimum standards, unacceptable on/off duty conduct, and
ineffective leadership. The rater commented the applicant continually
displayed misconduct and lapses in judgment despite counseling,
intervention, Letters of Reprimand (LOR), Unfavorable Information
File/Control Roster (UIF/CR) action, and civil convictions. Further,
the applicant was insubordinate towards his immediate supervisor and
failed to supervise a civilian minor under his sponsorship who
reportedly consumed alcohol. The applicant consumed alcohol while
underage and was cited for driving a vehicle without a valid driver’s
license. The applicant rebutted the rater’s comments but the
additional rater concurred with the rater.
On 11 Jul 01, a general court-martial found the applicant guilty of
using Ecstasy on divers occasions between, on, or about 1 May 00 and
18 Jul 00. He was sentenced to a BCD, confinement for 15 days,
forfeiture of $695.00 pay per month for one month, and reduction to
airman basic. The sentence was adjudged on 22 Mar 01, and, following
the appellate process, the sentence was affirmed on 6 Nov 02 and the
BCD ordered executed.
The applicant was separated with a BCD on 25 Feb 03 in the grade of
airman basic after 4 years, 1 month and 26 days of active service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFLSA/JAJM reminds the AFBCMR that its ability to correct records
related to courts-martial is limited to changing the sentence on the
basis of clemency and that it cannot reverse, set aside, or otherwise
expunge a court-martial conviction that occurred on or after 5 May
1950. There is no legal basis for upgrading the applicant’s
discharge. He was afforded all rights granted by statute and
regulation and he has failed to point to any legally sufficient reason
as to why the discharge should be upgraded. Clemency is not warranted
in this case and the applicant’s request should be denied.
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 23 Jul 04 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 error or injustice. After a thorough review of the
evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not
persuaded his BCD should be upgraded. The applicant’s contentions are
duly noted; however, we do not find these uncorroborated assertions,
in and by themselves, sufficiently persuasive to override the
rationale provided by AFLSA/JAJM. We therefore adopt the rationale
expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has not
sustained his burden of having suffered either an error or an
injustice. In view of the above and absent persuasive evidence to the
contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief
sought.
_________________________________________________________________
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 this application in
Executive Session on 21 October 2004 under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Ms. Deborah A. Erickson, Member
Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Member
The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2004-01530 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 May 04, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFLSA/JAJM, dated 12 Jul 04.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Jul 04.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03418
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-03418 INDEX CODE 106.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: Not Indicated MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 7 May 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her 2003 Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded. On 8 Oct 03, the applicant was separated in the grade of airman basic with a BCD after three years, five months and five days of...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-01574 INDEX CODE: 106.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The reasons applicant believes he has been the victim of an error and/or an injustice...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03093
The applicant was discharged on 21 Jan 88. We find no evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the applicant's submission, we do not believe he has suffered from an injustice. We considered upgrading his discharge on the basis of clemency; however, due to the serious nature of the offenses committed, in the short period of time in which he served, we believe that the characterization of his discharge was proper and in compliance with the appropriate directives.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03093
The applicant was discharged on 21 Jan 88. We find no evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the applicant's submission, we do not believe he has suffered from an injustice. We considered upgrading his discharge on the basis of clemency; however, due to the serious nature of the offenses committed, in the short period of time in which he served, we believe that the characterization of his discharge was proper and in compliance with the appropriate directives.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-02541 INDEX CODE 106.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 1960 Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to honorable or, in the alternative, his first (honorable) enlistment be separated from his second enlistment so he can receive medical benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-00941
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, 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: HQ AFLSA/JAJM recommends the application be denied. _________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: A majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02833
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2002-02833 INDEX CODE 105.01 105.06 106.04 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her 2001 bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-01433 INDEX CODE: 106.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 1955 Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be changed to an honorable or an under honorable conditions discharge. Further, given the fact that he had three court-martial convictions during his brief period of military service, we are not...
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 29 Aug 89 for a period of 4 years. A complete copy of the JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In his response, the applicant indicated that there is disagreement as to whether his paranoid schizophrenia was evident during his Air Force service. ...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-01243
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 29 Aug 89 for a period of 4 years. A complete copy of the JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In his response, the applicant indicated that there is disagreement as to whether his paranoid schizophrenia was evident during his Air Force service. ...