RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01243
INDEX CODE: 110.02
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 27 OCT 2007
__________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His separation code be changed to show he was not on the control
roster.
__________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was not on the control roster observation period at the time of
his discharge.
In support of his request, the applicant submitted a copy of his
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty;
DD Form 1058, Unfavorable Information Action; and, Letter of
Reprimand dated 16 July 1987.
His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
__________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 10 July 1980 in
the grade of airman basic for a period of four years.
On 17 November 1987, he was discharged with an honorable discharge,
Separation Code GFX - conditions that interfere with military
service - not disability - character and behavior disorder). He
received an RE code of 4I “Serving on Control Roster”.
He served 6 years, 11 months and 22 days on active duty.
On 16 July 1987 the commander notified applicant he was being
placed on the control roster effective 16 July 1987. The applicant
acknowledged receipt the same day and was provided the opportunity
to submit documentation for his commander’s consideration. He
submitted documentation; however, after reviewing the applicant’s
documentation, the commander decided to place applicant on the
control roster effective 21 July 1987. AFR 35-32, Unfavorable
Information Files, Control Rosters, Administrative Reprimands and
Admonitions, 17 October 1986, indicates control roster actions are
effective the date the decision authority signs section V of the AF
Form 1058.
AFI 35-32 further instructs the decision authority to add the words
“see sect V” following the word “effective” when completing the AF
Form 1058, Unfavorable Information Action under AFR 35-32. The
decision authorities entered 16 July 1987 instead of “see section
V.”
__________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial. DPPRS states based upon the
documentation in the master personnel records the discharge was
consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the
discharge regulation. Additionally, 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 process; nor did he
provide any facts warranting a change to his separation code and
GFX (conditions that interfere with military service – not
disability character and behavior disorder) is the correct code.
AFPC/DPPRS provided a copy of a memorandum provided to applicant by
DPPAE. The memorandum advises the applicant that control roster
actions are effective the date the decision authority signs section
“V” of the AF Form 1058. The commander signed the AF Form 1058 21
Jul 87 and placed the applicant on the control roster for 4 months.
Therefore, at the time of his discharge, he was still serving on
the control roster.
A complete copy of the DPPRS evaluation with attachment is at
Exhibit C.
__________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant
on 26 May 06, for review and comment within 30 days. As of this
date, no response has been received by this office.
__________________________________________________________________
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 to warrant
changing the separation code. We took notice of the applicant’s
complete submission in judging the merits of the case, however; we
agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office
of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for
our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an
error or injustice. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we
find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in
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-2006-01243 in Executive Session on 8 August 2006, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
Mr. John E. Pettit, Member
Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 17 Apr 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 19 May 06.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 May 06.
CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00397
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS states 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 applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing, nor did he provide any facts warranting a change to his character of service. We...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03938
On 4 April 1989, the applicant submitted an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his discharge be upgraded to honorable. The board further concluded that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge. Therefore, based on the available evidence of record, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider this application.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01358
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01358 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 27 SEPTEMBER 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, block 7a, be changed to reflect "Mexican-American." ...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01254
For this misconduct, he received a Record of Counseling dated 4 June 1988. On 8 September 1989, after consulting with counsel, applicant waived his right to submit a statement. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. HQ AFPC/DPPAE states the applicant received a reenlistment eligibility code of "2C," indicating the member was involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge, or entry-level separation without characterization, which is correct.
Accordingly, we find that corrective action is appropriate as a matter of equity and on the basis of clemency and recommend the discharge be upgraded to honorable. Exhibit B. CHARLENE M. BRADLEY Panel Chair AFBCMR 99-01084 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that: The pertinent military...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02258
A similar appeal was considered and denied by the Board on 15 January 1998. They also note the applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. DPPRS’s evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment on 14 October 2005.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-03203
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03203 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: Apr 20, 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her separation code on her DD Form 214 be changed to HFV (unqualified for active duty – other) and the narrative reason be changed to “conditions not a disability” instead of personality...
He recommended that the applicant be discharged with a general discharge. That office states that, based upon the documentation in the file, they believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 9 May 01.
He recommended that the applicant be discharged with a general discharge. That office states that, based upon the documentation in the file, they believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 9 May 01.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03382
He was convicted by Special Court-Martial (SPCM) Order Number 31, dated 3 April 1953, for on or about 17 March 1953, without proper authority, through neglect destroy, by throwing a shoe through a window pane, a window pane of value of about $2.50, military property of the United States; on or about 17 March 1953, assaulting an individual by striking at him with his fist and on or about 17 March 1953, disorderly in quarters. DPPRS states based on the documentation on file in the master...