RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00626
INDEX NUMBER: A02.15/16, A64.00
XXXXXXX, JR. COUNSEL: NONE
XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His discharge be upgraded to honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident
and he was not afforded due process in addressing the charges brought
against him.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 26
April 1978. He was progressively promoted to the grade of senior airman,
with an effective date and date of rank of 1 September 1980. On 1 June
1982, the commander notified him that he was being recommended for
discharge for frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military
and civilian authorities as evidenced by 2 Article 15s, 2 Letters of
Reprimand (LORs), numerous records of counseling, and three civil court
convictions. After consulting with military counsel, he waived his rights
associated with an administrative discharge board hearing contingent upon
receipt of a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. His
conditional waiver was accepted and he was discharged under honorable
conditions on 3 September 1982, under the provisions of AFM 39-12
(Misconduct - Frequent Involvement of a Discreditable Nature). He
completed a total of 4 years, 4 months, and 8 days of active service and
was serving in the grade of senior airman (E-4) at the time of discharge.
He received an RE Code of “2B,” which defined means "separated under AFM 39-
12 with less than an honorable discharge."
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied and states, in part, the
discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements
of the discharge regulation. The discharge was within the sound discretion
of the discharge authority and the applicant has not submitted any new
evidence or identified any errors or injustices that occurred in the
discharge processing.
The AFPC/DPPRS 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 26 March 2004 for review and response within 30 days. However, 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. We find no impropriety in the characterization of the applicant’s
discharge. It appears that responsible officials applied appropriate
standards in effecting the separation, and we do not find persuasive
evidence that pertinent regulations were violated or that applicant was not
afforded all the rights to which entitled at the time of discharge. We
conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and
characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing
circumstances.
4. We also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the
discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency. We have considered the
applicant's overall quality of service and the events which precipitated
the discharge; however, based on the evidence of record, we cannot conclude
that clemency is warranted. Applicant has not provided sufficient
information of post-service activities and accomplishments for us to
conclude that he has overcome the behavioral traits which caused the
discharge. Should he provide statements from community leaders and
acquaintances attesting to his good character and reputation and other
evidence of successful post-service rehabilitation, this Board will
reconsider this case based on the new evidence. We cannot, however,
recommend approval based on the current evidence of record.
_________________________________________________________________
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-2004-00626
in Executive Session on 1 June 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member
Ms. Carolyn B. Willis, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 7 Dec 03, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 17 Mar 04.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Mar 04.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01253
3) 19 Jan 82, applicant received a Letter of Counseling (LOC) for violating Air Force Standards. 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. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 May 06.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-03032
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-03032 INDEX NUMBER: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. Applicant was discharged on 15 Dec 72, in the grade of airman first class, under the provisions of AFM 39-12, by reason of unfitness, with service...
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-2004-00408
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00408 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 18 Jan 80, applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFM 39-12, by reason of misconduct - frequent involvement...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02547
___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant states that the applicant was discharged on 2 Jan 75, after 8 months and 22 days on active duty. Therefore, her DD Form 214, Report of Separation from Active Duty, does not list character and behavior disorder, personality disorder, or antisocial personality disorder as the basis for discharge. The applicant argues that the diagnosis of “Anti-Social Personality Disorder”...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02296
On 30 May 2001, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied applicant’s requests to change the narrative reason and authority for his separation and to change his RE code (Exhibit C). Applicant has not submitted evidence of any errors or injustices that occurred in the processing of his discharge, nor provided facts warranting a change to the narrative reason for his separation or RE code. Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00232
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. After consulting with military counsel, he waived his rights associated with an administrative discharge board hearing contingent upon his receipt of an honorable discharge. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2004-00232 in Executive Session on 1 June 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel...
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02867
On 24 Feb 97, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request to have his discharge upgraded to honorable. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 15 Oct 04 for review and comment within 30 days. Based on his overall record of service, the contents of the FBI...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02868
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02868 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 19 October 2004, the Board staff requested the applicant provide documentation regarding his activities since military service (Exhibit F). As of this...