RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-03703
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reenlistment (RE) code be changed to one that is favorable
for reenlistment.
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His discharge was under honorable conditions and he is trying to
enlist in the U.S. Army. His RE code is preventing his reentry.
He was told by his first sergeant that he would not be
discharged.
He did everything the military asked him to do, including
evaluation classes. He feels his discharge was unjust.
In support of his request, the applicant provided a copy of his
Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) and a copy of a letter
verifying his enrollment in Anger Management.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
_
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant entered the Regular Air Force on 5 Dec 89.
He was discharged with a RE code of 2B (separated with a general
or under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge).
On or about 11 Mar 92, the applicant received a civilian
citation for indecently exposing himself. On 7 Apr 92, he was
sentenced to 90 days in jail, fined $300, and unsupervised
probation for 180 days under the condition of no more criminal
charges.
On or about 22 Mar 92, the applicant received two civilian
citations for battery and was ordered to report to the base
mental health office. On 7 Apr 92, he was sentenced to 90 days
in jail for each citation, fined $100 for each citation, and
unsupervised probation for 180 days under the condition of no
more criminal charges.
On 13 May 92, the applicant was notified of pending discharge
actions. Specifically, the commander cited the applicants
civilian citations as the reason for discharge. The applicant
acknowledged receipt, consulted counsel, and waived his right to
submit statements in his own behalf.
On 18 May 92, the staff judge advocate found the applicants
case legally sufficient for discharge.
On 19 May 92, the discharge authority directed discharge with a
general (under honorable conditions) discharge without probation
and rehabilitation.
The applicant was discharged on 22 May 92 with a general
discharge and a reenlistment code of 2B. He served 2 years,
5 months, and 18 days on active duty.
On 10 Jul 95, the Discharge Review Board denied the applicants
request for a discharge upgrade to honorable.
________________________________________________________________
_
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. DPSOA states they found no
evidence of error or injustice; nor did the applicant submit any
such evidence.
The complete AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. DPSOS 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 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 processing. He provided no facts
warranting a change to his general (under honorable conditions)
discharge.
The complete AFPC/DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit D.
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the
applicant on 15 Feb 08 for review and comment within 30 days.
As of this date, this office has not received a 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. We took notice
of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of
the case; however, we agree with the opinions and
recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary
responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our
conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an
error or injustice. Therefore, 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 Docket Number BC-
2007-03703 in Executive Session on 20 Mar 08, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. XXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair
Ms. XXXXXXXXXX, Member
Ms. XXXXXXXXXX, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 29 Oct 07.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOA, w/atchs, dated 9 Jan 08.
Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 30 Jan 08.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Feb 08.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC 2008 00614
They found no evidence of error or injustice and the applicant did not submit any evidence. However, based on the evidence of record and in the absence of documentation pertaining to his post-service accomplishments, we cannot conclude that clemency is warranted. ________________________________________________________________ _ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC 2007 03587
JA states that because Anthrax Vaccination Program vaccination orders were inferred to be lawful at the time the applicant disobeyed his order, they opine that relief is not warranted. The complete AFPC/JA evaluation is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: The applicant states that only upon getting very sick after he received his second and third vaccination did he start to refuse further vaccinations....
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01317
DPSOS states that based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge, to include his characterization of service and RE code, was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. The complete HQ AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-00844
On 4 Mar 02, the applicant's commander notified her that he was recommending she be discharged from the Air Force for misconduct-minor disciplinary infractions. They found no evidence of error or injustice and the applicant did not submit any evidence. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-01497
On 2 Oct 89, the applicant’s commander notified him he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for misconduct. He was discharged on 11 Oct 89. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof of the existence of either...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02216
On 15 Mar 12, the applicant was discharged for Misconduct (Serious Offense), and was credited with 9 years, 10 months, and 2 days of total active service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the offices of the Air Force office of responsibility which are at Exhibit C and D. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02498
On 25 May 00, applicant appeared before the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting that his discharge be upgraded to honorable and his RE code be changed to allow his return to military service. The Board found that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiated an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge or an upgrade of his RE code. The Board further concluded that no legal or equitable basis exists for an upgrade of...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01107
On 4 Feb 09, the applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to recommend his discharge from the Air Force for entry level performance and conduct in accordance with AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen . Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge, to include the service characterization, was appropriately administered and within the discretion of the discharge authority. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02466
On 14 Dec 05, the applicant was notified of his commanders intent to recommend he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFPD 36-32, Air Force Military Training and AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, for Misconduct: Minor Disciplinary Infractions. On 7 Dec 10, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied the applicants request for upgrade of his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. RE Code 2B, is required per AFI 36-2606,...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-02173
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors that occurred in the discharge processing, and provided no facts warranting an upgrade to his discharge characterization. The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2008-02173 in Executive Session on 27 January 2009, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: