RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-03895
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 24 JUN 07
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an
honorable discharge.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He desires his discharge upgraded. He apologizes for any embarrassment his
actions may have brought to the Air Force and or his unit. When enlisted
he was very young and immature - not realizing the importance of
performance and citizenship. He indicates since discharge he has been
involved in the community and has learned the importance of character and
the need to be community minded and honest in all of his actions.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 11 January 1982, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force for a
period of six years.
On 11 August 1986, the applicant was notified of his commander's intent to
initiate discharge action against him for Unsatisfactory Performance --
Irresponsibility in the Management of Personal Finances. The specific
reasons follow:
a. On or about 23 July and 29 July 1982, he wrote checks to the
Bowling Alley and Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO) Club which were returned
due to insufficient funds. For this conduct he was counseled.
b. On or about 26 August 1982, he was over two years delinquent on
a student loan to Arkansas State University. He was given a Letter of
Reprimand (LOR) on 13 September 1982.
c. On or about 1 April 1983, he wrote a check to Recreation Supply
which was dishonored due to insufficient funds. For this conduct he was
counseled.
d. On or about 13 October 1983, he wrote a check to Gilbert Pinson
which was returned for insufficient funds. He was counseled and referred
for financial counseling.
e. On or about 17 October 1984, he was arrested by civilian
authorities for “theft by check -- misdemeanor.” He was counseled,
received a Letter of Counseling (LOC), and an Unfavorable Information File
(UIF) was created.
f. On or about 8 April 1985, he failed to pay for rental furniture
he rented from Budget Rents Furniture. For this conduct he was counseled
on 18 April 1985.
g. On or about 26 April 1985, he wrote a check to American Express
which was dishonored due to insufficient funds. He was counseled on 31 May
1985 and enrolled in a financial management class on 6 June 1985.
h. On or about 28 July 1985, he wrote a check to Pictures Inc.,
which was dishonored due to insufficient funds.
i. On or about 20 January 1986, he wrote a check on a closed
account and was given an LOR on 24 February 1986. UIF action was also
taken.
j. On or about 5 June 1986, he checked out three saltwater reels
from Recreation Supply and failed to return the equipment on the due date.
A delinquency charge was assessed which he failed to pay resulting in
involuntary collection.
The commander indicated in his recommendation for discharge action that
before recommending the applicant for discharge he was counseled on
different occasions, given four LORs and referred for financial counseling.
In view of these actions there was no reasonable expectation that further
rehabilitative efforts would improve his conduct.
The commander advised the applicant of his right to consult legal counsel
and submit statements in his own behalf. His failure to do either would
constitute a waiver of his right to do so.
After consulting with counsel, the applicant submitted a statement in his
own behalf.
On 19 August 1986, the Staff Judge Advocate recommended the applicant be
discharged from the Air Force with a general discharge without probation
and rehabilitation.
On 25 August 1986, the discharge authority approved the applicant’s general
(under honorable conditions) discharge.
On 28 August 1986, the applicant was discharged with service characterized
as general (under honorable conditions) in the grade of senior airman under
the provisions of AFR 39-10 - Unsatisfactory Performance. He served 4
years, 7 months, and 18 days of total active duty service.
Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI),
Clarksburg, West Virginia, indicated that they were unable to identify with
an arrest record on the basis of information furnished (Exhibit C).
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial indicating that the discharge was consistent
with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge
regulation and 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, nor did he provide facts
warranting a change to his character of service.
The evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 20 January 2006, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit E). As of this
date, no response has been received by this office.
On 8 February 2006, the Board staff requested the applicant provide post-
service documentation within 20 days (Exhibit F). The applicant provided
additional documentation which is at Exhibit G.
_________________________________________________________________
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 warranting the applicant’s general
discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The Board believes
responsible officials applied appropriate standards in effecting the
separation, and the Board does not find persuasive evidence that pertinent
regulations were violated or that the applicant was not afforded all the
rights to which entitled at the time of discharge. Therefore, in the
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to
recommend granting the relief sought.
4. Although the applicant did not specifically request consideration
based on clemency, we also find insufficient evidence to warrant a
recommendation the discharge be upgraded on that basis.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the
existence of an error or an injustice; the application was denied without a
personal appearance; and 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 7 March 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. James W. Russell III, Panel Chair
Ms. Barbara R. Murray, Member
Ms. Kathleen B. O’Sullivan, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2005-03895 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Dec 05, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Negative FBI Report.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 12 Jan 06.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Jan 06.
Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 8 Feb 06.
JAMES W. RUSSELL III
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03404
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-2004-01584
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 21 June 1983, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force in the grade of airman basic for a period of four (4) years. As of this date, no response has been received by this office. On 23 June 2004, the Board staff requested the applicant provide post- service documentation within 14 days (Exhibit F) and on 8 July 2004, the Board provided the applicant the opportunity to respond to the FBI...
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00053
mere AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN SRA | ee PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW ] NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL NONE MEMBERS SITTING ea ISSUES INDEX NUMBER f iS ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD A93.11, A94.05, A94.53 447.00 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE LETTER OF NOTIFICATION HEARING DATE 03-05-28 CASE NUMBER FD2003-00053 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL’S RELEASE...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03701
On 27 January 1989, he was notified by his commander that he was recommending he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airman, para 5-26d, Irresponsibility in the management of personal finances. Exhibit B. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 10 February 2008.
AF | DRB | CY2005 | FD2005-00235
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN | AB ay TYPE GEN PERSONAL APPEARANCE x RECORD REVIEW NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL MEMBER SITTING qa x x x x x ISSUES 493,99 INDEXNUMBER — 6 5) SUBMITIED 10 THE BOARD (9° I ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD 2 | APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 | LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 4 | BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE...
AF | DRB | CY2007 | FD2006-00256
P r e v ~ o i ~ s editton M 1 1 1 be used _ _A AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL KATIONALE CASh NLJMRER FD-2006-00256 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to l~onorable, to change the reason and authority for the discharge, and to change the reenlistment codc. d. As of 2 Sep 98, you failed to pay your rent on time for two months. This fact is evidenced by a Memorandum from the DPP Service Center, dated 26 May 99 (Atch Ij).
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00087
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00087 INDEX CODE: 131.09 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 9 JUL 2006 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Officer Grade Determination (OGD) conducted in 2002 be set aside and he be transferred to the retired Reserve in the grade of lieutenant colonel (O-5). He was promoted to the grade of...
AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0275
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD AFSN/SSAN NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE TYPE PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW COUNSEL NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL [YES | No | xX VOTE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS SITTING HON GEN UOTHC OTHER DENY x x Pe x xX xX a x ISSUES INDEX NUMBER EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD A94.05 A67.10 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 1 2 3 | LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 4 |...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03412
Based upon the documentation in the applicant's file, they believe his discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit F). After thoroughly reviewing the evidence or record, we find no evidence to show that the applicant’s discharge was erroneous or unjust.
AF | DRB | CY2004 | FD2004-00067
If he can provide additional documented information to substantiate his issues, the applicant should consider exercising his right to make a personal appearance before the Board. Copies of the documents to be forwarded to the separation authority in support of this recommendation are attached. You have been scheduled for an appointment with the 96th Mission Support Squadron, separations section, on 26 Jun 98 hours.