RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01983
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: American Legion
HEARING DESIRED: Not Indicated
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to
honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The applicant proffers no contentions. Applicant’s submission, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 15 July 1980, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force in the
grade of airman basic (E-1) for a period of 6 years. He was progressively
promoted to the grade of senior airman (E-4), with a date of rank of 1
September 1983. He was reduced to the grade of airman first class (E-3),
with a date of rank of 4 April 1984, pursuant to an Article 15. He
received four Airman Performance Reports closing 26 April 1984, 1 December
1983, 1 December 1982 and 14 July 1981, in which the overall evaluations
were 7, 7, 9 and 9, respectively. During these reporting periods, the
applicant received three AF Forms 77, Supplemental Evaluation Sheets, in
which he was cited as being a highly productive and professional
individual.
On 15 February 1984, he received a letter of reprimand for failure to pay
attention to detail by failing to show the desired aptitude and fortitude
in becoming proficient in his assigned specialty.
On 4 April 1984, he was charged with committing the offense of carnal
knowledge. For this incident, punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of
Military Justice (UCMJ), was imposed. He received a reduction to airman
first class, forfeiture of $300 of his pay per month for two months and
restriction to the limits of Offutt AFB for 60 consecutive days.
On 27 April 1984, the applicant’s commander initiated discharge proceedings
against him under the provisions of AFR 39-10, paragraph 5-49a, for
misconduct (Sexual Deviation). The applicant was notified of his
commander’s recommendation and that a general (under honorable conditions)
discharge was being recommended. He was advised of his rights and, after
consulting counsel, he elected not to submit statements in his own behalf.
In a legal review of the discharge case file, the staff judge advocate
found it legally sufficient and recommended that he be discharged from the
Air Force with a general discharge and concurred with the squadron
commander that the applicant not be considered for probation and
rehabilitation. On 16 May 1984, the discharge authority directed that he
be discharged with a general under honorable conditions discharge.
Subsequently, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-
10 (Misconduct – Sexual Deviation) and received a General (Under Honorable
Conditions) discharge. He served 3 years, 10 months, and 2 days on active
duty.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied. DPPRS states that based
upon the documentation in the file, they conclude that the discharge was
consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the
discharge regulation and that the applicant did not identify any errors or
injustices in the discharge processing. The Air Force evaluation is at
Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 3 September 2004, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was 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 of his characterization of service.
The applicant has provided no evidence which would lead us to believe that
the information in his discharge case file is erroneous, that his
substantial rights were violated, or that his commanders abused their
discretionary authority. In addition, he has provided no information to
support clemency on the basis of a successful post-service adjustment. In
the absence of such evidence, his request is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
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 14 October 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
Mr. John B. Hennessey, Member
Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered for AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2004-01983:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Aug 04 w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 30 Aug 04.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Sep 04.
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02136
On 2 July 1984, the applicant was notified by his commander that he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of Air Force Regulation (AFR) 39-10, Unsatisfactory Performance. The commander recommended the applicant receive a general (under honorable conditions) discharge based on the following: (1) On 27 November 1981, he received a Letter of Reprimand for being 3 hours late for work. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00321
The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing, nor did he provide any facts warranting a change to his general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The discharge appears to be in compliance with the governing regulation, and we find no evidence to indicate his separation from the Air Force was inappropriate. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01109
On 20 January 1984, the applicant failed to report for work. The discharge authority approved the recommendation on 16 May 1984, and directed that the applicant be discharged from the service and furnished a General Discharge certificate. ___________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 16 November 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36- 2603: Ms. Marilyn M. Thomas, Vice Chair Ms....
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02643
Applicant was separated from the Air Force on 30 April 1964 under the provisions of AFR 39-16 (personality and behavior disorder), with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 8 October 2004, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. As of this...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02349
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02349 INDEX CODE: 100.06 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be changed to honorable and his narrative reason for separation be changed. We considered applicant’s request for a change in the reason for separation, however, as noted by...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02851
The base legal services reviewed the case file and found it legally sufficient to support discharge. The Discharge Authority concurred with the recommendations and ordered a general discharge without P&R on 30 January 1986. The applicant, while serving in the grade of airman basic, was discharged from the Air Force on 3 February 1986 under the provisions of AFR 39-10 (misconduct - drug abuse) with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00028
On 30 January 1964, he appeared before a board of officers and the findings and recommendation was to separate him with an under other than honorable conditions (undesirable) discharge. The base legal services reviewed the report from the board of officers and found it legally sufficient to support the findings and recommendation to discharge him with an under other than honorable conditions (undesirable) discharge. On 8 April 1964, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04029
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-04029 INDEX CODE: COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE states that the applicant was discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. A complete copy of...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02740
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02740 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 27 June 1986 in...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01960
Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. _________________________________________________________________ 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...