Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-01818
Original file (BC-2004-01818.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-01818
            INDEX CODE:  110.01
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  General  (Under  Honorable  Conditions)  discharge   be   upgraded   to
Honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was not the best airman serving in the  Air  Force,  however  since  that
time he has served in the Michigan National Guard from February 2000 to  May
2001.  He has also served in the  United  States  Army  from  June  2001  to
September 2004, and received three Army Achievement Medals, two  Letters  of
Recognition, and one Certificate of Achievement.  He will soon  receive  his
first Good Conduct Medal for three years of  meritorious  service.   He  has
served one tour overseas in Korea where he  was  instrumental  in  his  unit
receiving the Philip A. Connelly Award  for  Food  Service  Excellence,  and
placing third in the Army worldwide  competition.   He  is  working  on  his
Associate’s Degree in Culinary Arts, and is an active  member  in  both  his
home church in Michigan and Arizona, where he is  presently  stationed.   He
returned to the military service  to  show  his  hard  work  and  prove  his
dedication to his country.

In  support  of  the  application,  the  applicant  submits   his   personal
statement,  a  copy  of  his  Army  Achievement   medals   (3)   and   award
recommendation  sheets  (3),  a  copy  of  his  Team   19   Certificate   of
Achievement,  a  copy  of  his  Merit  Citation,  a  copy  of  his  Finalist
Recognition Certificate, a copy of an excerpted newspaper  article,  a  copy
of Unit/Mess Section Challenges/Success, and a copy of  a  base  newsletter.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 7 October 1987, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air  Force  at  the
age of 18 in the grade of airman first class (E-3) for a period of four  (4)
years.

On 12 August 1988, he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR)  for  failing  to
maintain Air Force dress standards.   On  9  October  1988,  he  received  a
Letter of Counseling for being late  for  duty.   On  13  October  1988,  he
received a LOR for twice failing to take his end of course exam  because  he
failed to have his training record on hand.

On 15 November 1988, he received a LOR for failing to obey the  order  of  a
superior NCO.  On 23 November 1988, he received a Letter of  Counseling  for
substandard  duty  performance.   On  19 December  1988,   he   received   a
Memorandum for Record for failing to maintain  the  grill  in  a  clean  and
orderly appearance, despite repeated instruction to do so.

On 3 January 1989, he received a Memorandum for Record for failing  to  wash
and clean a van, in violation of repeated instructions  to  do  so.   On  30
January 1989, he received both a Letter or  Counseling  and  Memorandum  for
Record for failing to report for duty at the prescribed time  and  with  his
fatigue uniform not in compliance with AFR 35-10, and  did  thereafter  fail
to iron his fatigue uniform as ordered.

On 8 February 1989, the applicant was tried by a summary  court-martial  and
contrary to his plea of not guilty, found guilty of being  derelict  in  the
performance of his duties in that he  negligently  failed  to  maintain  his
room according to dormitory standards.  He was sentenced to  seven  days  of
confinement.

On 14 February 1989, the applicant’s commander  notified  him  that  he  was
recommending he be discharged from the Air Force  under  the  provisions  of
AFR  39-10  for  Misconduct  –  A  Pattern  of  Misconduct  –  Discreditable
Involvement with Military or Civil Authorities.  The applicant  acknowledged
receipt of the notification, consulted counsel,  and  waived  his  right  to
submit statements in his own behalf.  The discharge case file  was  reviewed
by the Assistant Staff Judge Advocate, and  was  found  legally  sufficient.
The discharge authority approved the recommendation and  directed  that  the
applicant be discharged from the service  and  furnished  a  General  (Under
Honorable Conditions) discharge.

On  24  February  1989,  the  applicant  was  discharged   Under   Honorable
Conditions (General) for  Misconduct  –  Pattern  Discreditable  Involvement
with Military or Civil Authorities.  He served 1  year,  4  months,  and  11
days on active duty.  He had seven days of lost time due to confinement.

On March 8, 1990, the applicant submitted an application to  the  Air  Force
Discharge Review Board  (AFRDB)  requesting  his  undesirable  discharge  be
upgraded to honorable.  The AFRDB stated the discharge was  consistent  with
the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation  and
was within the discretion of the discharge authority, and the applicant  was
provided full administrative due process.   AFDRB  concluded  there  was  no
legal or equitable basis for upgrade of the discharge  and  determined  that
the discharge should not be upgraded.

In response to the Board’s request, the FBI indicated they  were  unable  to
identify an arrest record pertaining  to  the  applicant  on  the  basis  of
information furnished (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states, based on  the  documentation
on file in the master personnel record, the discharge  was  consistent  with
the procedural and substantive requirements  of  the  discharge  regulation,
and was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  DPPRS  notes  the
applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors  or  injustices
to his character of service.

DPPRS complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force  Evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the  applicant  for
review and comment within 30  days.   As  of  this  date,  this  office  has
received no response (Exhibit D).  On 5  October  2004,  the  applicant  was
invited   to   submit   information   pertaining   to    his    post-service
accomplishments.  In his response dated  24  October  2004,  he  provided  a
personal statement,  and  a  copy  of  his  separation  document,  four  (4)
character  reference  letters,  and  duplicate  copies  of  his  awards  and
citations previously submitted with his original application (Exhibit E).

_________________________________________________________________

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  have  thoroughly  reviewed   the   circumstances   surrounding   the
applicant’s  discharge  and  find  no  evidence  to  show  the   applicant’s
discharge was erroneous or unjust.  Nevertheless, in view  of  the  evidence
provided by the applicant pertaining to his post-Air Force  accomplishments,
including a successful adjustment to civilian life, a  period  of  honorable
service in the Regular Army, and his current active membership in  the  Army
National Guard, we are of  the  opinion  that  upgrading  his  discharge  to
honorable  based  on  clemency  would  be  appropriate.    Accordingly,   we
recommend that 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 24 February 1989 he was  honorably
discharged and furnished an Honorable Discharge certificate.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive
Session on 18 January 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Robert S. Boyd, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Barbara J. White-Olson, Panel Member
                 Mr. Lanny Cawthon, Panel Member


The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR
Docket Number BC-2004-01818.

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 01 Jun 04.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 25 June 04.
      Exhibit D.  Letters, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 July 2004; and
                 AFBCMR, dated 5 October 2004.
      Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Letter, undated, w/atchs.




      ROBERT S. BOYD
      Panel Chair

AFBCMR BC-2004-01818






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 APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 24 February 1989, he
was honorably discharged and furnished an Honorable Discharge
certificate.




                                                       JOE G. LINEBERGER
                                                       Director
                                                       Air Force Review
Boards Agency

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03548

    Original file (BC-2002-03548.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant was discharged on 29 February 1988, in the grade of airman basic with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge, in accordance with AFR 39-10 (Misconduct - Pattern of Minor Disciplinary Infractions). The applicant submitted a request to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to have his general (under honorable conditions) discharge upgraded to honorable. Therefore, based on the information and evidence provided they recommend the applicant's request be denied (Exhibit D).

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-004334

    Original file (BC-2006-004334.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00434 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NOT INDICATED HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 18 JUL 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority, the applicant did not submit any...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03404

    Original file (BC-2006-03404.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 6 January 1989, the applicant’s commander notified him he was recommending him for discharge from the Air Force for misconduct. On 18 February 1988, the applicant received a No-Show Letter for failing to report for a scheduled appointment on 11 January 1988. p. On 18 February 1988, the applicant received a UIF entry for his delinquent account with the NCO Club. In regard to the RE code, the applicant has not provided any evidence showing that the assigned RE code was in error or...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01254

    Original file (BC-2003-01254.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    For this misconduct, he received a Record of Counseling dated 4 June 1988. On 8 September 1989, after consulting with counsel, applicant waived his right to submit a statement. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. HQ AFPC/DPPAE states the applicant received a reenlistment eligibility code of "2C," indicating the member was involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge, or entry-level separation without characterization, which is correct.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02039

    Original file (BC-2004-02039.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The base legal office reviewed the case file and found it legally sufficient to support the discharge and recommended an under honorable conditions (general) discharge without probation and rehabilitation (P&R). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS states, 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. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00140

    Original file (BC-2004-00140.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of their separation. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03007

    Original file (BC-2005-03007.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 10 December 1990, the applicant submitted a request to his commander that he be discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial. On 2 August 1991, the applicant submitted an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFRDB) requesting his discharge be upgraded to general. We have reviewed the evidence provided and are unable to conclude corrective action is warranted based on an injustice.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01950

    Original file (BC-2006-01950.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 21 July 1989, the applicant submitted an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01255

    Original file (BC-2004-01255.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 3 February 1951, the former member enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the age of 18 in the grade of airman basic (E-1) for a period of four (4) years. On 12 December 1955, the former member submitted an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFRDB) requesting his undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00623

    Original file (BC-2006-00623.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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, nor did he provide any facts warranting a change to his character of service. As of this date, this office has received no response. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.