Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC 2007 04124 2
Original file (BC 2007 04124 2.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
 

ADDENDUM TO 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

 DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-04124 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to an honorable 
discharge. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

RESUME OF CASE: 

 

On 19 January 2011, the Board considered and denied the 
applicant’s appeal. For an accounting of the facts and 
circumstances surrounding the applicant’s appeal and the 
rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of 
Proceedings, with attachments, at Exhibit H. 

 

In a letter to the Board dated 15 June 2012, the applicant, via 
his representative, requests reconsideration and provides 
additional evidence. He is not denying his lack of judgment and 
is truly sorry for what happened and is taking appropriate steps 
to make his life better. The bad conduct discharge is too severe 
a punishment because at that time he did not have the medical 
evidence showing he has Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD). If the 
medical evidence would have been available the judge would have 
been able to deliver a more equitable punishment. He further 
states that he seeks gainful employment in order to be a 
functioning member of society and is working towards a degree in 
Information Technology. He understands that he used poor 
judgment while in the Air Force. Medical tests provided show 
that his poor judgment was based largely on his ADD. He is not 
using this as an excuse, rather trying to understand the root of 
the problem and with guidance make better decisions. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit I. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

 

In an earlier finding, the Board determined there was 
insufficient evidence to warrant any corrective action. After 
thoroughly reviewing the additional documentation submitted in 
support of this appeal and the evidence of record, we do not 
believe the applicant has provided sufficient evidence to warrant 
an upgrade to the characterization of his service on the basis of 
clemency. Therefore, we find no basis upon which to recommend 
favorable consideration of the applicant’s request. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

 

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of an error or 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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2007-04124 in Executive Session on 4 April 2013, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2007-04124 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit H. Record of Proceedings, dated 31 January 2011, 

 w/atchs. 

 Exhibit I. Letter, Personal Representative, dated 15 June 

 2012, w/atchs. 

 

 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04570 ADDENDUM

    After thoroughly reviewing the additional documentation submitted in support of his appeal and the evidence of record, we do not find it sufficient to change the Board’s earlier determination in this case. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and the application will...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-02433-2

    Original file (BC-2012-02433-2.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    While the letter provided in support of his request is noted, we do not find it sufficiently persuasive to warrant the requested relief. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-1988-01539-2

    Original file (BC-1988-01539-2.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    By letter dated, 9 Dec 76, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) notified the applicant that his discharge was upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). However, in view of the AFDRB’s earlier decision, and the contents of the FBI Report, we are unpersuaded that an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge to fully honorable, his RE code of 2, or his reason for separation is warranted. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 5 Dec 06.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2004-00944-2

    Original file (BC-2004-00944-2.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s request and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit H. On 8 September 2006, the applicant submitted a request for reconsideration (Exhibit I), as the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit had provided a decision in the aforementioned case (Exhibit J). JAA provided an advisory on 19 September 2006 that recommended denial of the applicant’s reconsideration...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC 2011 04310 2

    Original file (BC 2011 04310 2.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2011-04310 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Reserve retirement be changed to a disability retirement. The applicant disagreed with the IPEB decision; however there is no evidence to show she sought further appellate review of the IPEB findings and recommended disposition. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01753

    Original file (BC-2011-01753.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Pursuant to a pretrial agreement, the applicant pled guilty to the charge and specification and was sentenced in accordance with his plea by a military judge to a BCD, confinement for four months, and reduction to the grade of airman basic (E-1). A review of the Record of Trial does not support the applicant’s allegation of error or injustice. Therefore, based on the available evidence of record, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider this application.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03489

    Original file (BC-2012-03489.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The reason he did not file an appeal through the ERAB is because it would require the documented reversal or amendment of the rater evaluation or written evidence to that fact, and he disagrees with his removal from command and contests the subsequent performance report. However, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-01040

    Original file (BC-2006-01040.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    The fact that applicant has been granted certain service connected disability ratings from the DVA does not entitle him to Air Force disability compensation, or change in his existing military disability ratings. The advisory did not mention the VA records he provided with this application, and he believes these records reflect that his judgment was impaired because he was not taking his medication as recommended. The fact the DVA did not lower his DVA service connected rating when his...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC 2007 02990

    Original file (BC 2007 02990.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 4 February 1976, the Board considered and denied a request from the applicant to amend his DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, to include the discharge authority. On 25 September 2008, the Board considered and denied his request for a medical retirement, a change to his narrative reason for separation, RE code, award of the AFGCM, completed basic training, completed career development courses, and promotion to the grade of sergeant. We have...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC 2011 04145 3

    Original file (BC 2011 04145 3.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) case, Docket Number BC-2002- 02848 had similar facts wherein the PAFSC was not correct and negatively impacted the officer's promotion. The applicant also asserts, in essence, that based on the error with his PAFSC that his appeal is similar to AFBCMR BC-2002-02848 and that relief is warranted using the same rationale for an SSB. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The...