Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02131
Original file (BC-2004-02131.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved


                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02131

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general discharge be upgraded to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His  first  sergeant  made  homosexual  advances  towards  him,  which
resulted in his having to be evaluated.   He  also  had  a  number  of
problems with his commander, particularly after he filed an  Inspector
General (IG) complaint.

He would like for his general discharge to be upgraded to honorable so
that he can pass down a positive legacy to his son, who  is  following
in his footsteps in serving his country.

In  support  of  his  appeal,  the  applicant  provided  an   expanded
statement.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 9 Sep 74.

On 11 Aug 76, the applicant’s  commander  notified  him  that  he  was
initiating action against him with a view to effecting the applicant’s
discharge because of numerous counselings for tardiness and being  out
of uniform, several letters of reprimand (LORs)  for  being  late  for
work and not properly preparing  for  instructing  a  class  of  basic
trainees, and Article 15 actions for failure to go  to  his  appointed
place of duty.  The applicant was advised  that  a  general  discharge
would be recommended.


On 18 Aug 76, the evaluation officer  advised  the  applicant  of  his
rights, including his right to submit a rebuttal and  make  statements
in his own behalf.  The applicant submitted a statement of rebuttal to
the discharge action.  On 23 Aug 76, he  reviewed  the  facts  of  the
discharge  case  and  personally  interviewed   the   applicant.    He
recommended the applicant be discharged with a general discharge.

On 30 Aug 76, the  office  of  the  Staff  Judge  Advocate  found  the
discharge case file to  be  legally  sufficient  and  recommended  the
applicant be furnished a general discharge.

On 1 Sep 76, the discharge authority approved the discharge action and
directed the applicant be furnished a general discharge.

On 3 Sep 76, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of  AFM
39-12 (Unsuitability - Apathy, Defective Attitudes  and  Inability  to
Expend Effort Constructively) and furnished a general  discharge.   He
was credited with 1 year, 11 months, and 25 days of active service.

The  Federal  Bureau  of  Investigation,  Clarksburg,  West  Virginia,
indicated that, on the basis of data furnished,  they  are  unable  to
locate an arrest record (Exhibit C).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS  recommended  denial   indicating   that   based   on   the
documentation in the applicant’s records, the discharge was consistent
with the procedural and  substantive  requirements  of  the  discharge
regulation, and was within the discretion of the discharge  authority.
In their view, the applicant did not submit any evidence  or  identify
any errors or injustices that occurred in  the  discharge  processing,
and he provided no facts warranting  a  change  to  his  character  of
service.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 8 Oct
04 for review and response.  As of this date,  no  response  has  been
received by this office (Exhibit E).

In response to the Board’s staff request for documentation  pertaining
to his activities since leaving the service,  the  applicant  provided
additional documentary evidence for the Board’s  consideration,  which
is attached at Exhibit G.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  The evidence of record reflects that the applicant was  discharged
for unsuitability.  No evidence has been presented which would lead us
to believe his discharge was improper or  contrary  to  the  directive
under which it was effected.  However, we note that the applicant  was
discharged in 1976.  In view of the passage  of  time,  and  since  it
appears the applicant has made a  successful  transition  to  civilian
life, we believe the continued stigma of the general discharge for the
offenses committed no longer serves any useful purpose.  Therefore, we
are of  the  opinion  that  upgrading  the  applicant’s  discharge  to
honorable, based on clemency,  would  be  appropriate  in  this  case.
Accordingly,  we  recommend  the  applicant’s  general  discharge   be
upgraded to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 3 Sep 76,  he  was
honorably discharged and furnished an Honorable Discharge certificate.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 8 Dec 04, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Ms. Martha J. Evans, Panel Chair
      Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member
      Mr. Michael J. Novel, Member

All members  voted  to  correct  the  records,  as  recommended.   The
following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-
2004-02131 was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Jul 04, w/atch.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  FBI Report.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 29 Sep 04.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Oct 04.
     Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 19 Oct 04.
     Exhibit G.  Letter, applicant, dated 24 Oct 04, w/atch.





                                   MARTHA J. EVANS
                                   Panel Chair








AFBCMR BC-2004-02131




MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air
Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority
of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is
directed that:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to , be corrected to show that on 3 Sep 76, he was
honorably discharged and furnished an Honorable Discharge certificate.







    JOE G. LINEBERGER

    Director

    Air Force Review Boards Agency

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02793

    Original file (BC-2004-02793.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02793 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded to honorable. The evidence of record reflects the applicant was discharged for drug abuse. Exhibit B.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00784

    Original file (BC-2005-00784.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPR recommended denial indicating the Separations Section of the applicant’s Military Personnel Flight (MPF) was contacted and the noncommissioned officer (NCO) who processed the applicant’s separation application stated the applicant was briefed on the Fiscal Year 2005 (FY05) Force Shaping Limited Active Duty Service Commitment Program and the possibility of recoupment. After a thorough review of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00785

    Original file (BC-2005-00785.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPR recommended denial indicating the Separations Section of the applicant’s Military Personnel Flight (MPF) was contacted and the noncommissioned officer (NCO) who processed the applicant’s separation application stated the applicant was briefed on the Fiscal Year 2005 (FY05) Force Shaping Limited Active Duty Service Commitment Program and the possibility of recoupment. After a thorough review of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02233

    Original file (BC-2004-02233.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    We are not persuaded by the evidence presented that the uncharacterized entry-level separation received by the former member should be changed to an honorable discharge. Rather, as was noted by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, an entry-level separation with uncharacterized service is used in those cases where the member has not yet completed six months of service at the time separation proceedings were, for whatever reason, initiated. However, after a thorough review of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01796

    Original file (BC-2004-01796.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: By letter, dated 25 Oct 04 (sic), the applicant’s counsel provided additional documentary evidence for the Board’s consideration, which is attached at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02210

    Original file (BC-2004-02210.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 18 March 2004, he received a Letter of Counseling for failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty. Evidence has not been provided in support of his appeal, which would lead us to believe that a change to his RE code is warranted. Absent persuasive evidence that the applicant was denied rights to which he was entitled or that the appropriate standards were not applied during his discharge processing, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03151

    Original file (BC-2002-03151.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03151 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Based on his post service activities and accomplishments...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03151

    Original file (BC-2002-03151.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03151 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Based on his post service activities and accomplishments...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02206

    Original file (BC-2004-02206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant on 22 September 2003, submitted an AF Form 31, Airman’s Request for Early Separation/Separation Based on Change in Service Obligation, requesting she be separated in accordance with AFI 36- 3208, paragraph 3.11, Air Force nonfulfillment of enlistment agreement. Based on the evidence provided they recommend the requested relief be denied. Based on the documentation in the applicant's records, it appears the processing of the discharge and the characterization of the discharge...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01526

    Original file (BC-2004-01526.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01526 INDEX NUMBER: 131.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be promoted from the grade of airman second class (A2C) to airman first class (A1C). There are no other promotion orders in his record to indicate he was ever promoted to A1C. We took notice of the applicant's...