Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01285
Original file (BC-2007-01285.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-01285
            INDEX CODE:  110.02

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  27 OCTOBER 2008


___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The narrative reason for her discharge be changed.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She    initiated    the    discharge    action     and     inaccurate
mischaracterizations and allegations were used against her.

In support of her appeal, applicant submitted a personal statement, a
Report  of  Investigation,  a  copy  of  her  DD  Form  214,  and  an
Application for Admission to the Bar of Maryland.

Applicant’s complete submission, with  attachments,  is  attached  at
Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 11 January 1989 in
the grade of airman basic (E-1) for a period of four years.

The applicant’s commander notified her that he  was  recommending  her
for discharge  for  unsatisfactory  duty  performance.   The  specific
reasons for the discharge action were:

      a.    On 11 April 1989, the applicant  was  counseled  regarding
her lackluster attitude during class.

      b.    On 1 May 1989, the applicant was counseled and  placed  on
remedial instruction and probation for failing her Module 3 test.

      c.    On 8 June 1989, the applicant was interviewed for  failing
to  meet  the  requirements  of  the  Reading/Writing  and   Listening
Comprehension portion on Proficiency Aptitude Test 1.

      d.    On 9 June 1989, the  applicant  made  comments  indicating
that she wanted out of the AF and would do just about anything to  get
out.  She also wrote a  poem  saying  keeping  her  in  the  AF  could
possibly or would be a danger to other people.  She also stated if she
were put in a job fixing airplanes,  she  might  not  tighten  a  bolt
enough, and could not be responsible for people’s lives.   On  another
occasion she stated she would tell the AF that she was a communist and
studying communism.

      e.    On 15 June 1989, the applicant was dropped from her class.


      f.    On 15 June 1989, the applicant underwent a  mental  status
evaluation.  The  evaluation  determined  the  applicant  demonstrated
developmental/personality  characteristics  that  contributed  to  her
difficulty adjusting to the demands of a military environment.

      g.    On 14 July 1989, the applicant received an Article 15  for
being Absent Without Leave (AWOL) from 5 July 1989 to 8 July 1989.

The commander advised the applicant of her  right  to  consult  legal
counsel, that military legal counsel had been obtained  for  her,  of
her right to submit statements in her own behalf, and that failure to
consult counsel or to submit statements would constitute a waiver  of
her right to do so.

On  3  August  1989,  the  applicant  acknowledged  receipt  of   the
notification of discharge and after  consulting  with  legal  counsel
submitted a statement in her own behalf.

On 16 August 1989, a legal review was conducted in  which  the  staff
judge advocate recommended the applicant receive an  under  honorable
conditions (general) discharge without probation and  rehabilitation.


On 28 February 1983, the discharge authority approved the  separation
and  directed  that  the  applicant  be  discharged  with  a  general
discharge without probation and rehabilitation.

The applicant was separated for unsatisfactory performance  from  the
AF on 6 September  1989  in  the  grade  of  airman  with  a  general
discharge.  She was credited with 7 months  and  22  days  of  active
service.

___________________________________________________________________

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 an injustice.   We  took  notice  of  the
applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case;
however, we find the applicant has failed to  sustain  her  burden  of
proof that she has suffered either an error or an injustice.  Based on
the documentation in the applicant's  records,  it  appears  that  the
processing of  the  discharge  was  appropriate  and  accomplished  in
accordance with the applicable Air Force  regulation.   The  applicant
has not shown the characterization of her service was contrary to  the
provisions of the applicable regulation.  Nor has she shown the nature
of the discharge was unduly harsh or disproportionate to the  offenses
committed.  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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2007-01285 in  Executive  Session  on  12  September  2007  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. Michael J. Novel, Panel Chair
                       Mr. Richard K. Hartley, Member
                       Mr. Reginald P. Howard, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 Apr 07, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Extract AFR 39-10.




                                        MICHAEL J. NOVEL
                                        Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00290

    Original file (BC-2006-00290.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 5 August 2002, the discharge authority directed the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-3208, paragraph 5.26.3, with an honorable discharge without P&R. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 12 May 2006, the applicant was notified that attempts to obtain her service medical records from the Department of Veteran’s Affairs were unsuccessful; therefore, without her service medical records,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-01586

    Original file (BC-2004-01586.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    She struggled with her weight from that time until she was discharged in 1998. On 12 January 1998, the applicant’s commander notified the applicant he was recommending she be discharged from the Air Force for Failure in the Weight Management Program. After summarizing the relevant facts contained in the applicant’s service personnel and medical records and her DVA records, the BCMR Medical Consultant indicated that, although not definitively diagnosed while in service, service medical...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01034

    Original file (BC-2007-01034.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01034 INDEX CODE: 106.00, 110.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: October 2, 2008 ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His characterization of service be upgraded from general under honorable conditions to honorable, and his Reenlistment Eligibility Code (RE) be upgraded so he can...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02221

    Original file (BC-2006-02221.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02221 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 25 JANUARY 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Narrative Reason for Separation (Unsatisfactory Performance) be removed. She received an Enlisted Performance Report closing 6 November 1989 in which the overall evaluation was 1....

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00479

    Original file (BC-2004-00479.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00479 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her under honorable conditions (general) discharged be upgraded to honorable. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00460

    Original file (BC-2007-00460.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00460 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 19 AUGUST 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code and her under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded. On 5 September 1990, the applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02118

    Original file (BC-2007-02118.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02118 INDEX CODE: 106.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 2 January 2009 ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. He is currently under treatment with mental health [sic] and the subject has bothered...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02140

    Original file (BC-2006-02140.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    After reviewing her military records, they returned it on 10 August 2006, as there was no justification to change her service dates. She submitted a Standard Form 180 sometime in 1984 “to prepare for review of discharge”, and stated on her form that her dates of active service were from 25 October 1983 to 6 January 1984. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2006-02140 in Executive Session on 11 July...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03288

    Original file (BC-2006-03288.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPPAE states the applicant’s records were reviewed along with statements she submitted, and based on the circumstances of her discharge find no evidence or injustice. Therefore, the RE code is correct and she has not submitted any evidence nor documentation from medical authorities that the condition no longer exists. The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03574

    Original file (BC-2006-03574.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03574 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 28 MAY 2008 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The applicant’s commander further indicated he was recommending the applicant receive an under...