Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00071
Original file (BC-2005-00071.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:            DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00071
                                        INDEX CODE 107.00, 100.06
                                        COUNSEL:  None

                                        HEARING DESIRED:  No

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  8 Jul 06

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His 1983 Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) and Reenlistment Eligibility (RE)  code
be upgraded so that he can reenlist.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

During the period in  question,  he  was  going  through  a  separation  and
subsequent divorce.  His wife had removed funds from their checking  account
without his knowledge and he did not know he was  writing  bad  checks.   He
was emotionally unstable  and  most  of  his  absent  without  leave  (AWOL)
periods were the result of his being found in bed after he was  supposed  to
be on duty.  Since his discharge, he had only two major legal problems:  the
first was a driving-under-the-influence (DUI) and the other was a  breaking-
and-entering (B&E) that he changed his mind about after he started.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 29 Jan 01  for  a  period
of four years.  He was assigned to the 57th Aircraft Generation Squadron  at
Nellis AFV, NV as a unit tactical aircraft maintenance specialist.

Medical entries indicate, on 31 Aug 81, Social  Actions  (SA)  referred  the
applicant for evaluation of alcohol and drug use.  He had been  experiencing
trouble sleeping.  Sep 81 entries reflect the applicant’s wife had left  him
about three months ago and, on 25 Sep 81, his  commander  referred  him  for
evaluation due
to emotional, marital, and legal problems and  possible  suicidal  ideation.
The applicant had been undergoing psychotherapy without progress.

On 8 Oct 81, the applicant was admitted into the hospital due to  depression
and suicidal ideation.  On 28 Oct 81, he  failed  to  report  to  the  First
Sergeant’s office after being discharged from the hospital.   The  applicant
voluntarily returned to duty on 1 Nov 81.

On 15 Dec 81, he was stopped for having expired license plates and found  to
have outstanding warrants for failure to appear  on  previous  tickets.   He
was incarcerated at the North Las Vegas Jail (NLVJ) pending  trial.   On  17
Dec 81, he was released from the  NLVJ  custody  after  being  convicted  of
several traffic violations.  He was fined $805.00.

On 29 Jan 82, the applicant failed to  report  to  his  appointed  place  of
duty.  On 2 Feb 82, he voluntarily returned to duty.  On 16 Feb 82,  he  was
placed in civil confinement at the NLVJ for neglecting  to  pay  fines  from
previous arrests.  He was released on 17 Feb  82,  but  did  not  report  to
anyone in authority.  His release was not known until  19  Feb  82;  he  was
administratively classified as a deserter  due  to  pending  action  on  the
previous AWOL.

On 11 Mar 82, the Airman Performance Report (APR) for the period  29 Jan  81
through 28 Jan 82, was referred  to  the  applicant.   He  was  marked  down
severely in many performance factors and was given an overall  rating  of  1
(9 being the highest).  The evaluators found  the  applicant’s  performance,
attitude, and ability to conform to military standards sorely lacking.   The
applicant did not contest the report.

On 15 Mar 82, the applicant requested emergency evaluation  to  discuss  the
effects of illegal drug use over the weekend (hashish,  alcohol,  and  other
unknown  substances).   The  medical  report  noted   the   effects/symptoms
suggested hallucinogenics.  The commander was contacted for drug screening.

On 10 May 82, a special court-martial (SCM) convened at Nellis AFB  and  the
applicant was tried for the following:

      --Charge I, Violation of UCMJ, Article 123a, knowingly writing  checks
with insufficient funds for the following 12 Specifications:

            1.  On 20 Jun 81, a check for $50.00 to the Nellis AFB
                             Exchange.
            2.  On 21 Jun 81, a check for $100.00 to the Exchange.
            3.  On 22 Jun 81, a check for $50.00 to the Exchange.
            4.  On 25 Jun 81, a check for $100.00 to the Exchange.
            5.  On 26 Jun 81, a check for $100.00 to the Exchange.
            6.  On 26 Jun 81, a check for $100.00 to the Exchange.
            7.  On 1 Sep 81, a check for $50.00 to an individual.
            8.  On 1 Sep 81, a check for $50.00 to an individual.
            9.  On 1 Sep 81, a check for $65.00 to an enlisted member.
            10. On 1 Sep 81, a check for $50.00 to an enlisted member.
            11. On 3 Sep 81, a check for $40.00 to an enlisted member.
            12. On 15 Sep 81, a check for $40.00 to an individual.

      --Charge II, Violation of UCMJ, Article 86,  being  AWOL  and  leaving
his appointed place of duty without authority on:

            1.  1 Nov 81.
            2.  15-17 Dec 81.
            3.  29 Jan-2 Feb 82.
            4.  16-22 Feb 82.
            5.  9 Mar 82.

On Charge I, the applicant  pled  not  guilty  to  all  specifications.   On
Charge II, he pled guilty to the first  specification;  not  guilty  to  the
second,  third  and  fifth  specifications;  and  guilty   to   the   fourth
specification except for the period 18-22 Feb 82, rather than 16-22 Feb 82.

On Charge I, the court found the applicant not guilty of the  first  through
sixth specification;  guilty  of  the  seventh,  eighth,  ninth,  tenth  and
eleventh specifications; and guilty of the twelfth specification  except  on
19 Sep 81, rather than 15 Sep  81.   On  Charge  II,  the  court  found  the
applicant guilty of the first through fourth specifications but  not  guilty
of the fifth specification.

Punishment was confinement at hard labor  for  five  months,  forfeiture  of
$150.00 per month for five months, and a BCD.  The sentence was adjudged  on
20 May 82 and, following appellate processes, approved on 14 Jul 82.

The applicant was released from confinement on 24 Sep  82  and  returned  to
duty.  On 8 Feb 83, the Air Force Court  of  Military  Review  affirmed  the
findings and sentence.

The applicant was separated in the grade of airman basic on 1 Mar  83,  with
a BCD and  an  RE  code  of  2B  (separated  with  less  than  an  honorable
discharge), after one year, three months and nine days  of  active  service.
Time lost for the following periods:  28-31 Oct 81,  15-16 Dec  81,  29 Jan-
1 Feb 82, 16-21 Feb 82, and 20 May 82-23 Sep 82.

Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation  (FBI),
Washington, D.C., provided an investigative  report  which  is  attached  at
Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS believes the discharge was consistent with the procedural  and
substantive requirements of the discharge  regulation  and  was  within  the
discharge authority’s discretion. The applicant has  not  substantiated  any
errors or injustices and his appeal should be denied.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  the  applicant
on 21 Jan 05 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this  date,  this
office has received no response.

On 8 Feb 05, the AFBCMR Staff invited the applicant to  submit  post-service
information.  On 3 Mar 05, a copy of the FBI report  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant for review and comment within 20 days.   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 waive the failure to timely file.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or injustice.  The applicant’s  contentions  are  duly
noted; however, we are not persuaded his BCD and RE code should be  changed.
 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.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record,  we
believe that, given the circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s  special
court-martial and the resultant BCD, the RE code issued  was  in  accordance
with the appropriate directives.  The applicant has not established  to  our
satisfaction that the actions taken against him were not driven by  his  own
misconduct.  Further, according to the FBI report, the  applicant  continued
his misbehavior after his separation.  Therefore, we conclude relief is  not
warranted on the basis of error, injustice, or clemency.

_________________________________________________________________

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 8 June 2005 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Dorothy P. Loeb, Member
                 Mr. Clarence D. Long III, Member

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2005-
00071 was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 28 Dec 04, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  FBI Report.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 19 Jan 05.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRB, dated 21 Jan 05.
      Exhibit F.  Letters, AFBCMR, dated 8 Feb & 3 Mar 05.




                                             MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
                                             Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04082

    Original file (BC-2002-04082.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-04082 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge be upgraded. -- On 21 May 81, applicant was notified of his commander's intent to impose nonjudicial punishment on him under Article 15, UCMJ. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-1984-04083A

    Original file (BC-1984-04083A.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 13 Oct 83, his commander recommended discharge. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant contends, as a diabetic herself, that her husband’s elevated blood sugar episode was not properly followed up by the Air Force. Review of service and DVA medical records through 1992 show no evidence of diabetes, and evaluation by DVA physicians also indicate no...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-1991-02293A

    Original file (BC-1991-02293A.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 13 Oct 83, his commander recommended discharge. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant contends, as a diabetic herself, that her husband’s elevated blood sugar episode was not properly followed up by the Air Force. Review of service and DVA medical records through 1992 show no evidence of diabetes, and evaluation by DVA physicians also indicate no...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01197

    Original file (BC-2004-01197.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01197 INDEX CODE 100.06, 107.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214 be corrected to reflect (1) a Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code that allows reenlistment, (2) additional time served, and (3) receipt of the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award (AFOUA), the Expert...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03875

    Original file (BC-2005-03875.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005- 03875 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 23 JUNE 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02826

    Original file (BC-2007-02826.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02826 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 1 Aug 81, the applicant was counseled for failure to go. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF FBI...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201141

    Original file (0201141.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant responded, indicating that nothing can change the facts or the past. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his general discharge should be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03806

    Original file (BC-2002-03806.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 11 Sep 80, applicant was notified of his commander's intent to vacate the suspended nonjudicial punishment because he again failed to report for duty at the appropriate time. The commander, on 14 Oct 80, determined that applicant was guilty of the offenses and imposed punishment consisting of forfeiture of $224.00 per month for two months, restriction to base for 45 days, and a reduction to the grade of airman basic, with a new date of rank of 14 Oct 80. He had completed a total of 2...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00509

    Original file (BC-2006-00509.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 on 17 Mar 06 for review and comment within 30 days and on 17 Apr 2006, he was forwarded a copy of the FBI report. Novel, Panel Chair Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member Mr. John E. B. Smith, Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Feb...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02867

    Original file (BC-2004-02867.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...