RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00138
INDEX CODE 106.00
COUNSEL: NONE
XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 16 JULY 2007
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a general (under
honorable conditions) discharge.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He believes his court-martial and discharge was unjust because he was
a security policeman. He was not allowed to continue paying
restitution of checks written for insufficient funds. His records
alone tell of his character. He was not told about rehabilitation, or
allowed to continue to pay restitution to the bank. He feels if he was
not in security, he would not have been court-martialed, but because
he was, he feels he was made an example of, and should have been given
the opportunity to stay in the Air Force.
In support of his application, applicant provides a personal letter.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 22 May 1973 and was
progressively promoted to the grade of sergeant.
A special court-martial convicted the applicant of five specifications
of wrongfully and unlawfully writing checks with insufficient funds in
his checking account. Applicant was sentenced to a bad conduct
discharge and reduced to the grade of airman basic. The sentence was
affirmed by Special Court-Martial Order Number 39, dated 20 April
1977.
The applicant was separated from the Air Force 22 April 1977 under the
provisions of AFR 39-12, Separation for Unsuitability, Misconduct,
Resignation, or Request for Discharge for Good of the Service and
Procedures for the Rehabilitation Program and Special Court-Martial
Order Number 14, with a bad conduct discharge. He served on active
duty for a period of 3 years, 8 months, and 16 days.
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report which is attached
at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial and stated that based upon the
documentation on file in the available 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. Applicant did not submit
any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the
discharge processing. He provided no facts warranting a change to his
character of service.
AFPC/DPPRS’s complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 3 February 2006, for review and comment within 30 days.
As of this date, no response has been received by this office.
A copy of the FBI was forwarded to the applicant on 18 April 2006, for
review and comment within 14 days.
_________________________________________________________________
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 any corrective action is warranted. We therefore agree with the
recommendations of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed as
the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain
his burden of having suffered either an error or an injustice. No
evidence has been submitted which would lead us to believe that the
characterization of his service was improper. In addition, in view of
the contents of the FBI Report of Investigation, we are not persuaded
that an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge to general is
warranted on the basis of clemency. Therefore, based on the available
evidence of record, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider
his request.
_________________________________________________________________
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-
2006-00138 in Executive Session on 4 May 8, 2006, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Panel Chair
Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member
Ms. BJ White-Olson, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 7 Jan 06, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Available Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 26 Jan 06.
Exhibit D. FBI Report, dated 23 Mar 06.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Feb 06.
Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 18 May 06.
WAYNE R. GRACIE
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00295
DPPRS states that based on the documentation on file in the applicant’s master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. Additionally, the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing, and she provided no facts warranting an upgrade of her discharge. Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 15 Feb 06.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02793
________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was immature and away from home for the first time. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial, stating the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, 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, and...
The recommendation for discharge for misconduct was approved and the commander directed that applicant be given an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. On 23 Dec 83, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39- 10 (Misconduct-Pattern of Minor Disciplinary Infractions) in the grade of airman first class with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge and an RE code of 2B (Separated with other than an honorable discharge). Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS,...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00306
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00306 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 6 JUN 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. f. On 6 August 1981, he received a Letter of Counseling (LOC), for being delinquent to the NCO...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00424
___________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 19 Apr 74, in the grade of airman basic (E-1), for a period of six years. Punishment imposed was a reduction in grade to airman (E-2) and forfeiture of $100 for one month; (10) O/a 3 and 4 Apr 78, applicant received an Article 15 for failure to go to his prescribed place of duty on time. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation,...
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 | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-06-02466
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02466 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 18 FEB 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge and the narrative reason for separation be changed. Therefore, based on the evidence of record, we...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00365
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00365 INDEX CODE: 110.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 8 AUGUST 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded. The regulation in effect at that time required that a member be issued an undesirable discharge. Copy of Directive cc:...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00457
One previous conviction was considered in this case. He was credited with 2 years, 4 months, and 3 days of active military service (excludes 151 days lost time due to confinement). The discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02195
Applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-22 (Conviction by Civil Court) with an undesirable discharge on 1 May 54, in the grade of airman basic. The discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority. Exhibit C. FBI Report of Investigation.