ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-1999-01926
INDEX CODE: A68.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 14 Aug 06
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to general.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 10 Jan 01, the Board considered and denied an application
pertaining to the applicant, in which he requested that his BCD be
upgraded to general. A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings is
attached at Exhibit H (with Exhibits A through G).
By application, dated 31 Jan 05, the applicant again requests that his
BCD be upgraded to general. He indicates it has been seven years
since his discharge, and he has tried to better himself. He has
admitted to his misconduct, and is trying to move on with his life.
He believes that he served his country proudly and would feel much
better about himself without the stigma of the BCD.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit I.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. In an earlier finding, we determined that there was insufficient
evidence to warrant any corrective action regarding the applicant’s
request for upgrade of his BCD. We have reviewed the applicant’s most
recent submission and find the evidence provided insufficient to
warrant a reversal of our previous determination in this case. The
applicant again has not provided any evidence that his service
characterization, which had its basis in his conviction by general
court-martial and was a part of the sentence of the military court,
was improper. The documentation provided with his most recent
submission was noted. However, because of the short duration since
the applicant’s separation and the serious nature of the offenses
committed, we do not find upgrading the applicant’s BCD based on
clemency is appropriate in this case at this time. Accordingly, we
find no basis to act favorably on his request for upgrade of his BCD.
2. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been
shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will
materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
1999-01926 in Executive Session on 8 Apr 05, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Ms. Marilyn M. Thomas, Member
Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member
The following additional documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit H. Record of Proceedings, dtd 25 Jan 01, atchs.
Exhibit I. DD Form 293, dated 31 Jan 05, w/atchs.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-1996-02552E
A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit P. On 7 Jul 98, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s request that his BCD be upgraded to honorable. On 5 Mar 04, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s request his BCD be upgraded to honorable or general (under honorable conditions). _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2002-03280A
Applicant’s complete submissions, with attachments, are at Exhibits I, J, and K. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Medical Consultant recommended denial indicating that the evidence of record shows the applicant’s mental health provider of two years provided testimony during her general court-martial. A complete copy of the Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC2002-01531-3
SECOND ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-01531 INDEX CODE: 100.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, he requests he be given credit for two enemy aircraft shot down on 1 January 1945. He states members of the Board of Directors of the Eighth Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-1996-02552A4
THIRD ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-1996-02552 INDEX CODE: A68.00 COUNSEL: ANNA PAT KRUPKIN HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to honorable. In earlier findings, the Board determined that there was insufficient evidence to warrant any corrective action regarding the applicant’s...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2001-00612-2A
For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s separation, and, the rationale for the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit E. On 26 February 2004, the applicant submitted a request for reconsideration, through the American Legion, contending that an Unemployment Commission Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) determined that the government did not have adequate evidence to discharge him from the Air Force Reserve and he was granted...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-1999-03347
The majority of the Board finds insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency. The applicant’s UOTHC discharge may have been appropriate for the circumstances at the time. JOE G. LINEBERGER Director Air Force Review Boards Agency AFBCMR BC-1999-03347 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,...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-1999-00780B
SECOND ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-1999-00780 INDEX CODE: 104.00 COUNSEL: Mr. Fred L. Bauer HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be reinstated to the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA). A Wing Honor Board (WHB) found the applicant in violation of the USAF Academy Honor Code on the allegation that he had obtained...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01394
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFRC/FMFQ indicates that original source documents received from the applicant’s unit of assignments indicate a total of 44 days of accrued leave were sold. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02538-2
For an accounting of the facts and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings, with attachments, at Exhibit F. By letter, dated 20 January 2005, the applicant submitted a request for reconsideration, with attachments, contending that it was his understanding that one reason he was not continued at rank was because he was not directly in support of the global war on terrorism. After again reviewing this application and the evidence provided in support...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02538A
For an accounting of the facts and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings, with attachments, at Exhibit F. By letter, dated 20 January 2005, the applicant submitted a request for reconsideration, with attachments, contending that it was his understanding that one reason he was not continued at rank was because he was not directly in support of the global war on terrorism. After again reviewing this application and the evidence provided in support...