RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00632
INDEX NUMBER: 110.00
COUNSEL: DAV
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 23 AUG 06
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to
honorable.
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He had previous unknown medical conditions while in the service.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
___________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 24 Jul 81, for a
period of six years in the grade of airman basic. His highest
grade held was airman first class.
On 1 Nov 83, applicant’s squadron commander notified him that he
was recommending he be discharged from the Air Force for
discreditable involvement with military or civil authorities. He
recommended the applicant receive a general discharge based on the
following reasons: (1) Letter of Reprimand (LOR) on 12 Jul 82, for
violating dormitory visitation policies on 29 May 82; (2) Article
15 on 30 Sep 82, for damaging, and wrongfully appropriating a
military vehicle on or about 19 Sep 82, punishment imposed was
reduction in grade to airman basic and forfeiture of $250.00 pay
per month for two months; however, reduction below the grade of
airman was suspended until 15 Feb 83. On 10 Dec 82, his driving
privileges were revoked for 12 months; (3) On 24 Jun 83, he was
notified he was overdue on his Deferred Payment Plan account; (4)
On 19 Aug 83, he was counseled for his dishonored check on 17 Jun
83; (5) LOR on 24 Aug 83, for driving on a revoked license, using
provoking gestures with a security policeman, disobeying a lawful
order and interfering with a security policeman’s duties; (6)
Article 15 on 5 Oct 83, for being disrespectful to a senior NCO on
19 Sep 83; punishment imposed was reduction in grade to airman
basic and forfeiture of $150 pay per month for two months;
reduction below the grade of airman and forfeitures were suspended
until 10 Apr 84; (7) On 24 Oct 83, the suspension of reduction to
the grade of airman basic and forfeiture of $150 pay per month for
two months was vacated for failure to obey a lawful order on or
about 20 Oct 83.
On 2 Nov 83, after consulting with counsel, applicant acknowledged
receipt of the discharge notification, and chose not to submit
statements in his own behalf.
The staff judge advocate reviewed the case and found it legally
sufficient to support separation and recommended applicant receive
an under honorable conditions (general) discharge without probation
and rehabilitation. On 17 Nov 83, the discharge authority approved
the separation and directed the applicant be separated with an
under honorable conditions (general) discharge without probation
and rehabilitation.
His Standard Form 88, Report of Medical Examination, dated 2 Nov
83, reflects he was qualified for world-wide duty at the time of
his separation.
Applicant was discharged on 29 Nov 83, in the grade of airman
basic, under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Misconduct-Pattern
Discreditable Involvement with Military or Civil Authorities, and
received an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. He was
issued an RE Code of 2B [separated with a general discharge]. He
served on active duty for a period of 2 years, 4 months, and 6
days.
___________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPRS reviewed this application and recommended denial.
They stated, in part, that 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. The discharge was within the discretion of the
discharge authority. Additionally, the applicant provided no
evidence or identified any errors or injustices that occurred in
the discharge processing. He provided no facts warranting a change
to the character of service.
A complete copy of the 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 11 Mar 05 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this
date, no response has been received by this office. (Exhibit D)
On 29 Mar 05, a copy of the Air Force advisory opinion was
forwarded to the applicant’s counsel for review and comment. To
date, no response has been received by this office. (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. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. After careful
consideration of the available evidence, the discharge appears to
be in compliance with the governing regulations in effect at the
time and we find no evidence to indicate that the applicant’s
separation from the Air Force was inappropriate. We find no
evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the
documentation that has been submitted in support of applicant’s
appeal, we do not believe he has suffered from an injustice.
Therefore, based on the available evidence of record, we find no
basis upon which to favorably consider this application.
___________________________________________________________________
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-2005-
00632 in Executive Session on 28 April 2005, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
Mr. Charlie E. Williams Jr., Member
Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Feb 05.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 3 Mar 05.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Mar 05.
Exhibit E. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Mar 05.
MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03875
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 | CY2005 | BC-2005-00071
On 11 Mar 82, the Airman Performance Report (APR) for the period 29 Jan 81 through 28 Jan 82, was referred to the applicant. 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. 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...
He received an LOR on 7 Apr 82 for failing to report for duty on 3 April 82. On 17 May 83, after consulting with counsel, the applicant requested discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his UOTHC discharge should be upgraded to honorable or general.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03896
On 28 Jul 83, the base legal office reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient and recommended applicant’s unconditional waiver be accepted and that he be discharged with an under other than honorable conditions discharge without probation and rehabilitation. On 5 Aug 83, applicant was discharged in the grade of airman basic, under the provisions of AFR 39-10, for a pattern of misconduct - discreditable involvement with military or civil authorities, with an under other than...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00509
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-2005-01991
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01991 INDEX CODE: 106.00, 100.05 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 24 Dec 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214 reflect an Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) of 81150 rather than 81130, and his 1985 discharge be upgraded from general to honorable. According to his Enlisted...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01602
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01602 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 24 OCTOBER 2008 ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded to honorable. In support of his application, the applicant submits a copy of his DD 214 and his application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03391
On 11 Feb 83, the applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to recommend nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 of the UCMJ for wrongful possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia. After consulting counsel, applicant requested a hearing before an administrative discharge board and elected to submit statements on his own behalf. The board recommended that he be discharged because of misconduct with an under other that honorable conditions discharge and that he not be...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03970
On 22 Dec 82, he received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 for financial irresponsibility and was reduced in grade from staff sergeant to sergeant. In their view, the Tower Amendment was not applicable to the applicant because he was reduced in grade prior to completion of 20 years of active service. In order for the applicant to have been eligible for retirement pay recalculation under the Tower Amendment, he would have needed 20 years of active service at the time he held the...
Although he received an overall rating of 8 on his performance report, the comments of his reporting official indicated that he had difficulties in maintaining standards as required by AFR 35-10. f. Substandard duty performance (20 Jan 82 - 31 May 92). The Board requested applicant provide additional evidence pertaining to his post-service activities (see Exhibit F). However, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force based on the facts that existed at the time of his separation.