Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03895
Original file (BC-2005-03895.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

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


Similar Decisions

  • 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-2004-01584

    Original file (BC-2004-01584.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ 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

    Original file (FD2003-00053.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (BC-2007-03701.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (FD2005-00235.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (FD2006-00256.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (BC-2005-00087.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (FD2002-0275.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (BC-2006-03412.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (FD2004-00067.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.