Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02856
Original file (BC-2006-02856.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-02856
                                        INDEX CODE:  110.00
                                        COUNSEL:  NONE
                                        HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  24 MARCH 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  general  (under  honorable  conditions)  discharge   be   upgraded   to
honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His life has improved dramatically since his separation from the Air  Force.
 He has been employed at the same job for 22 years and has  been  sober  for
more than 13 years.  When he was in the military he was young and naïve  and
had many personal problems.

Applicant  submits  no  supporting  documentation.    Applicant’s   complete
submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 4 January 1982, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air  Force  in  the
grade of airman basic (E-1) for a period of 4 years.  He  was  progressively
promoted to the grade of airman first class (E-3), with a date of rank of  4
January 1983.  He received three Airman Performance Reports closing  22  May
1984, 3 January 1984 and 3 January 1983, in which  the  overall  evaluations
were 6, 9, and 7 respectively.

On 24 February 1984, he was charged with operating  a  vehicle  while  drunk
and leaving the scene of an accident.  For this incident,  punishment  under
Article 15, Uniform Code  of  Military  Justice  (UCMJ),  was  imposed.   He
received a suspended reduction to airman, and $150 forfeiture of his pay.

On 27 April 1984, he was incapacitated for the proper  performance  of  duty
as a result  of  previous  indulgence  in  intoxicating  liquor.   For  this
incident, his suspended reduction was vacated.

On 23 May 1984, the applicant’s commander  initiated  discharge  proceedings
against him under the provisions  of  AFR  39-10,  paragraph  5-47a,  for  a
pattern of misconduct.   The  applicant  was  notified  of  his  commander’s
recommendation and that a general discharge was being recommended.   He  was
advised of his rights; he consulted  with  counsel  and  elected  to  submit
statements in his own behalf.  In a  legal  review  of  the  discharge  case
file, the staff judge advocate found it legally sufficient  and  recommended
he be discharged from the Air Force with a general discharge  and  concurred
with the commander that the applicant not be considered  for  probation  and
rehabilitation.  On 8  June  1984,  the  discharge  authority  directed  the
applicant be discharged with a general discharge.  He was discharged  on  15
June 1984.  He served 2 years, 5 months, and 12 days on active duty.

Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of  Investigation  (FBI)
provided a copy of an  Investigative  Report,  No.  18405TA3,  which  is  at
Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied.  DPPRS  states  that  based
upon the documentation in the file, they conclude  that  the  discharge  was
consistent  with  the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements   of   the
discharge regulation and that the applicant did not identify any  errors  or
injustices in the discharge processing.  The complete  DPPRS  evaluation  is
at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was sent to the applicant on  13  October
2006 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this  date,  this  office
has received no response.

A copy of the FBI Investigative Report was  sent  to  the  applicant  on  14
November 2006 for review and comment within 14 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  error  or  injustice.   After  careful  consideration  of  the
applicant’s request  and  the  available  evidence  of  record,  we  see  no
evidence that the information in his discharge case file is  erroneous,  his
substantial rights were  violated,  or  that  his  commanders  abused  their
discretionary authority.  Applicant’s contentions were noted;  however,  the
limited evidence provided,  in  our  estimation,  is  not  of  a  sufficient
quality and quantity to  warrant  the  approval  of  the  requested  relief.
Accordingly, his request is not favorably considered.

___________________________________________________________________

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 Docket  Number  BC-2006-02856
in Executive Session on 28 November 2006, under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:

            Ms. Cathlynn B. Novel, Panel Chair
            Mr. Don H. Kendrick, Member
            Ms. Judith B. Oliva, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining  to  Docket  Number  BC-2006-
02856 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Sep 06.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  FBI Investigative Report No.18405TA3.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 3 Oct 06.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Oct 06.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 14 Nov 06.




                                   CATHLYNN B. NOVEL
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02950

    Original file (BC-2006-02950.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The DPPRS complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was sent to the applicant on 20 October 2006 for review and comment within 30 days. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2006-02950 in Executive Session on 28 November 2006, under the provisions of AFI...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02681

    Original file (BC-2006-02681.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02681 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 5 Mar 08 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The narrative reason (Misconduct-Drug Use) for his 1983 honorable discharge be removed from his DD Form 214. On 18 Nov 83, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03791

    Original file (BC-2006-03791.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03791 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: May 28, 2008 _____________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. He was informed at discharge, that after a period of time, he could have his discharge certificate upgraded to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03212

    Original file (BC-2006-03212.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03212 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 22 APRIL 2008 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) in 1995 and 1996 to have his...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03790

    Original file (BC-2006-03790.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant was discharged on 12 Jun 87, in the grade of airman basic (E-1), under the provisions of AFR 39-10, for Misconduct-Pattern of Minor Disciplinary Infractions, and received an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. Pursuant to the Board’s request on 24 Jan 07, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided a copy of an investigation report, which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03635

    Original file (BC-2006-03635.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    His punishment consisted of reduction in rank to the grade of airman basic (AB) (E-1) and restriction to the base for 60 days. On 11 February 1987, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend him for discharge for misconduct under the authority of Air Force Regulation (AFR) 39-10, paragraph 5-47b and 5-49c, with a general discharge. The discharge authority directed the applicant be discharged without probation or rehabilitation with a general (under honorable...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03944

    Original file (BC-2006-03944.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03944 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 30 JUNE 2008 ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to general. On 13 Sep 54, the wing commander recommended the applicant’s request for discharge be accepted and he be separated with an...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02584

    Original file (BC-2006-02584.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02584 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 28 FEBUARY 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded. His complete response is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03785

    Original file (BC-2006-03785.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was discharged on 29 Mar 73. Other than his own assertions, the applicant has provided no evidence that would lead us to believe the actions taken to effect his discharge were improper, or that the information in his discharge case file is erroneous. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Jan 07; AFBCMR dated 26 Jan 07.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02748

    Original file (BC-2006-02748.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02748 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 13 MAR 08 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On 9 May 1991, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s...