Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03022
Original file (BC-2006-03022.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03022
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  2 APRIL 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be  upgraded  to
a general (under honorable conditions).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His military  service  was  exemplary  as  evidenced  by  his  receiving  an
Achievement Medal and Commendation Medal.  The only thing he did  wrong  was
to try to keep his family together.   His  wife  was  active  duty  and  was
having an affair with  her  OIC.   He  thought  the  Air  Force  frowned  on
fraternization, but he was the only one punished.

The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force  on  11
Jul  78.   He  served  on  continuous  active  duty  and  entered  his  last
enlistment on 21 Jun 87.

On 22 Mar 89, applicant’s commander preferred court-martial charges  against
him for one (1) count of assault.   Specifically,  applicant  assaulted  his
wife.  On  22  Mar  89,  after  consulting  with  legal  counsel,  applicant
submitted a voluntary request for discharge  in  lieu  of  trial  by  court-
martial.  He  understood  that  if  his  request  was  approved  he  may  be
discharged with an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge.

Headquarters Third  Air  Force  legal  office  and  the  base  legal  office
reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support separation  and
recommended applicant’s request for discharge in lieu  of  court-martial  be
approved and that he  receive  an  under  other  than  honorable  conditions
(UOTHC) discharge.

On 13 Apr 89, the  discharge  authority  approved  applicant’s  request  for
discharge and directed that he  be  discharged  with  an  under  other  than
honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge.

Applicant was discharged on 1 May 89, in the grade of staff sergeant  (E-5),
under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Request for Discharge in  Lieu  of  Trial
By Court-Martial, and received an  under  other  than  honorable  conditions
(UOTHC) discharge.  He served on active duty for 10 years, 9 months, and  21
days.

Pursuant to the request of the Board on 29 Nov 06,  the  Federal  Bureau  of
Investigation, Clarksburg, WV, indicated on 30 Nov 06, that,  on  the  basis
of data furnished, they are unable to locate an arrest record (Exhibit C).

_______________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied,  and  states,  in  part,
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.   Additionally,  the
applicant provided no facts warranting a change  to  his  under  other  than
honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge.

The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 1 Dec 06, a copy of  the  Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant for review and comment within 30 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
available evidence, the discharge appears  to  be  in  compliance  with  the
governing regulations in effect at the time  and  we  find  no  evidence  to
indicate  that  the  applicant’s  separation  from   the   Air   Force   was
inappropriate.  We find  no  evidence  of  error  in  this  case  and  after
thoroughly reviewing the documentation that has been  submitted  in  support
of applicant’s appeal, we do not believe he has suffered from an  injustice.
 Therefore, based on the available evidence of  record,  we  find  no  basis
upon which to favorably consider this application.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been  shown
that a personal appearance with or without counsel will  materially  add  to
our understanding of the issue  involved.   Therefore,  the  request  for  a
hearing 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-
03022 in Executive Session on 9 January 2007, under the  provisions  of  AFI
36-2603:

      Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
      Ms. Mary C. Puckett, Member
      Mr. Patrick C. Daugherty, Member

The following documentary evidence  pertaining  to  Docket  Number  BC-2006-
03022 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Sep 06.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  FBI Report of Investigation.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 6 Nov 06.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Dec 06.




                                             KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
                                             Panel Chair



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03313

    Original file (BC-2006-03313.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03313 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 26 APRIL 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. Additionally, the applicant provided no facts warranting a change to her under other than honorable...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03608

    Original file (BC-2006-03608.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 24 Jun 96, applicant applied to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his under other than honorable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. After review of the evidence of record, the AFDRB concluded that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. The Board further...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02006

    Original file (BC-2006-02006.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02006 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 9 January 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. Further, we may base our decision on matters of inequity and clemency rather than simply on whether rules...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02356

    Original file (BC-2006-02356.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    DPPRS states 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, and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. _________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: A majority of the Board finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be denied. LAURENCE M. GRONER Panel...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02356

    Original file (BC-2006-02356.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    DPPRS states 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, and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. _________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: A majority of the Board finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be denied. LAURENCE M. GRONER Panel...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01531

    Original file (BC-2006-01531.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 26 July 2005, he was discharged under the provisions of AFI 36- 3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen for entry-level performance or conduct for failure to make satisfactory progress in a required training program and was issued an entry-level uncharacterized separation. Additionally, he provided no facts warranting a change in his RE code or narrative reason for separation. AFBCMR (Processing) DARYL R. LAWRENCE Examiner Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02023

    Original file (BC-2006-02023.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RE code 2C indicates involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service. 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 and adopt their rationale as the basis for the conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01163

    Original file (BC-2006-01163.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The complete DPPRS evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant responded and states he believes the medical evidence he provided identifies errors in the discharge process. After careful consideration of the available evidence, we found no indication that the actions taken to affect his discharge were improper or contrary to the provisions of the governing regulations...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00434

    Original file (BC-2006-00434.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00434 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NOT INDICATED HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 18 JUL 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. Therefore, based on the evidence of record, we find no basis upon which to favorably...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02134

    Original file (BC-2006-02134.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 8 Dec 67, the applicant, then an Airman (E- 2), was charged with four specifications of larceny, in violation of Article 121, UMCJ. The discharge authority approved his request for discharge for the good of the service and directed that he be discharged with an undesirable discharge. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 26 Jul 06.