RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02196
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 15 JANUARY 2007
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to
honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
If his discharge was upgraded, it would make it possible for him to
get a better paying job. He was discharged when he was 20 years old.
He is now 40 years old and has grown mentally with the marriage of 20
years and the birth of two children.
In support of his appeal the applicant submits a copy of DD Form 293,
Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed
Forces of the United States.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 21 June 1982. He
was promoted to the grade of airman first class (E-3) with an
effective date and date of rank of 24 March 1984.
On 5 November 1984, the applicant's commander notified him that he was
recommending him for discharge from the Air Force for misconduct -
pattern of misconduct prejudicial to good order and discipline. The
commander recommended a general (under other than honorable
conditions) discharge based on the following:
(1) On 24 March 1983, he received an Article 15 for issuing
worthless checks in the amount of $265.00.
(2) On 30 May 84, he was verbally counseled for issuing a
worthless check in the amount of $45.00.
(3) On 19 June 1984, he was verbally counseled for issuing a
worthless check in the amount of $25.00.
(4) On 11 September 1984, he was arrested by Okaloosa County
Sheriff’s Department for issuing a worthless check in the amount of
$9.65.
(5) On 12 September 1984, he received a Letter of Counseling for
failure to maintain dormitory room standards.
(6) On 12 September 1984, he received a Letter of Reprimand for
failing a scheduled dormitory room inspection.
(7) On 24 September 1984, he received an Article 15 for failure
to go to a scheduled appointment and for being AWOL from 18-24
September 1984.
(8) On 2 November 1984, his suspended reduction was vacated for
failing to return to duty.
Applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge and
after consulting with legal counsel waived his right to submit
statements in his own behalf. The base legal office reviewed the case,
found it legally sufficient to support separation, and recommended the
applicant be discharged with a general (under honorable conditions)
discharge without probation and rehabilitation. The discharge
authority approved the separation and directed the applicant be
discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge
without probation and rehabilitation.
On 23 November 1984, the applicant was separated from the Air Force
under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen
(misconduct-pattern of misconduct prejudicial to good order and
discipline), with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.
He served 2 years, 4 months and 27 day of total active military
service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial. 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.
The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors
or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. He provided
no facts warranting an upgrade of his discharge.
AFPC/DPPRS’s complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 7
October 2005 for review and comment within 30 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 excuse the failure to timely file.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of an error or injustice. After a thorough review of
the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not
persuaded that his discharge should be upgraded. We agree with the
opinion and recommendation of the Air Force and adopt its rationale as
the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain
his burden of having suffered either an error or an injustice. The
only other basis upon which to upgrade his discharge would be based on
clemency. However, applicant has failed to provide documentation
pertaining to his post service activities. Should he provide
documentary evidence pertaining to his post service activities we
would be willing to reconsider his appeal. In the absence of such
evidence, favorable action is not recommended. 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2005-02196 in Executive Session on 8 November 2005, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member
Ms. Jan Mulligan, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Jul 05, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 3 Oct 05.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Oct 05.
KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03532
The commander was recommending the applicant receive an UOTHC discharge based on the following: (1) On 10 April 1984, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand for failure to report at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty. Having found no error or injustice with regard to the actions that occurred while the applicant was a military member, we conclude that no basis exists to grant favorable action on his request. Exhibit E. FBI Investigative Report.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00750
He did on or about 14 March 1983, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit: Area Defense Counsel, 1330 hours in violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 86, as evidenced by a Letter of Reprimand (LOR), dated 16 March 1983. c. He did on or about 18 May 1984, fail to report to his appointed place of duty, to wit: Building 90726, training section as it was his duty to do so in violation of the UCMJ, Article 86, as evidenced by a Letter...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03758
(3) On 5 June 1989, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand for reporting for duty over two hours late. Having found no error or injustice with regard to the actions that occurred while the applicant was a military member, we conclude that no basis exists to grant favorable action on her request. Exhibit E. FBI Report, dated 24 Jan 06.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00745
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00745 INDEX CODE: 100.3, 100.06 XXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 4 SEP 2006 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code, narrative reason for separation and separation code be changed. On 20 November 1985, the applicant was notified...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01966
On 15 October 1984, the Air Force Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for upgrade of his discharge and concluded the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and that the applicant was provided full due process. However, after thorough review of the evidence of record, it is our opinion that the comments of the Air Force office of primary responsibility are supported by the evidence of record. We...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00218
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00218 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 24 JUL 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). The evidence of record indicates the...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01232
The discharge authority approved the separation and directed that applicant be discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge without probation and rehabilitation. Based on the documentation in the file, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. We are not persuaded by the evidence presented that the commander abused his discretionary authority when he initiated the discharge action, and since we find...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02039
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 | CY2006 | BC-2005-03503
On 15 June 1984, applicant's commander recommended discharge for drug abuse. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial and 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. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we are not persuaded that the actions...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02649
The commander was recommending the applicant receive a general (under honorable conditions) discharge based on the following: (1) On 17 January 1984, the applicant received a Record of Counseling for failure to perform task in proper sequence. (2) On 27 February 1984, the applicant received a Record of Counseling for failure to monitor the B-3500 computer. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his general discharge for...