RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01571
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to
honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
During his enlistment he was not involved with the civil authorities.
He received an Article 15 and was involved in an accident on -----
AFB, but was found to be not at fault for the accident.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant entered into the Air Force on 26 December 1978. On
10 July 1980, his commander notified him, that he was recommending he
be discharged, under the provisions of AFR 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 in matters of a discreditable nature with
military authorities), with a general (under honorable conditions)
discharge. The basis for the action was that on 10 March 1979, he
received an Article 15 for wrongfully using provoking and reproachful
words towards an allied Air Force student; on 10 March 1979, he
received a Letter of Reprimand for loitering on post (sleeping); on 10
April 1980, he received counseling for failure to annotate AFTO Form
374, Operators Inspection Guide and Trouble Report; on 10 April 1980,
received counseling for violation of AFR 35-10; on 10 April 1980,
received counseling for vehicle misuse; on 25 May 1980, received
counseling concerning a speeding ticket received on base; on 2 June
1980, received 3 Armed Forces Traffic Tickets involving an accident
and on 2 June 1980, received an Article 15 for violation of California
Vehicle code. He waived his right to a hearing before an
administrative discharge board and submitting statements in his
behalf. The base legal office found the case was legally sufficient
to support discharge. He was discharged on 21 July 1980, 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), with a
general (under honorable conditions) discharge. He served a total
1 year, 6 months and 26 days of active duty service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial. 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 discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.
The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors
or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. He provided
no other facts warranting an upgrade of his discharge.
The AFPC/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 4
Jun 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 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 to warrant an upgrade of his
discharge. After careful consideration of the available evidence, we
found no indication that the actions taken to effect 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 only other basis upon which to upgrade his discharge would be
based on clemency. However, applicant has failed to provide
documentation pertaining to his post service activities. 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 Docket Number BC-2004-
01571 in Executive Session on 10 August 2004, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:
Mr. John L. Robuck, Panel Chair
Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Member
Ms. Carolyn B. Willis, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, undated.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 27 May 04.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Jun 04.
JOHN L. ROBUCK
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01125
The evaluation officer recommended the applicant receive a general discharge and not be considered for rehabilitation. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of investigation, Washington, D.C., indicated on the basis of the data furnished they were unable to locate an arrest record which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS states the applicant has not submitted any evidence nor identified...
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...
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-2003-03585
________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 17 July 1978, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force in the grade of airman basic (E-1) at the age of 17 for a period of 6 years. On 24 April 1980, the applicant received a record of counseling for failure to report to work. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01131
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. Nor did he provide any facts warranting a change to his character of service. Based on the evidence of record, we cannot conclude that clemency is warranted.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00041
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00041 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be changed to an honorable discharge. A new DD 214, Correction to DD Form 214, was issued changing the reason for discharge to read, “Unsuitability: Apathy and Defective Attitude.” The DPPRS evaluation is at...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00331
Upon review, the discharge authority stated the member’s behavior was too serious to warrant a general discharge and ordered a UOTHC discharge without P&R. On 17 November 1982, the Air Force Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for upgrade of his discharge. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that at the time...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02257
Based on available documentation in the file, they found the discharge consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. Although the applicant did not specifically request consideration based on clemency, we also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the discharge be upgraded on that basis. Exhibit D. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 11 Aug 04 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Aug 04.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03498
(4) On or about 23 January 1980, applicant willfully disobeyed a lawful command from a superior commissioned officer, to return to his office. A FBI Report was forwarded to the applicant on 7 January 2005 for review and response within 15 days. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his discharge should be upgraded to honorable.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02623
This past year, he joined the Army National Guard, and states that he does not suffer from a character or behavior disorder. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant’s personnel records do not contain separation documentation other than his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. The results of the mental health evaluation rendered diagnoses of Impulse Control Disorder Not Otherwise Specified, and...