Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-1982-01513-4
Original file (BC-1982-01513-4.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

SECOND ADDENDUM TO
                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-1982-01513
                                             COUNSEL:  None
            XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX                HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

In his appeal for reconsideration, applicant requests  three  days  of  lost
time (1-3 Nov 74), as well as information used by the Air Force  to  justify
the lost time, be expunged from his DD Form 214 and military records.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

In January 1982, the applicant requested his  DD  Form  214  be  amended  to
reflect that, among other things, the period 1-3 Nov 74 was  not  lost  time
and that he had a total of four years and  three  days  of  active  service.
His request was considered and denied by the Board on 17 Jan 83.

The applicant has requested reconsideration  several  times  throughout  the
years, all of which were denied because he provided no evidence meeting  the
criteria for reconsideration.  An appeal was reconsidered and denied by  the
Board on 6 Jan 05.   For  an  accounting  of  the  facts  and  circumstances
surrounding the rationale of the earlier decisions by  the  Board,  see  the
Addendum to the Record of Proceedings (ROP) at Exhibit P.

On 17 Oct 07, the applicant submitted another request  for  reconsideration.
In support of this request, he provides a copy of an  analysis  of  the  ROP
dated 17 Jan 83, prepared by an attorney.  However, the applicant  does  not
have documented counsel.  The applicant’s complete submission is at  Exhibit
Q.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

In earlier findings, it was determined that there was insufficient  evidence
to show that the three days of lost time, to include  any  information  used
to justify the lost time, should be expunged  from  his  records.   After  a
careful reconsideration of his request and his most  recent  submission,  we
do not find the evidence presented  sufficiently  compelling  to  warrant  a
revision of the earlier determinations in this case.  As  indicated  earlier
in the USAF/JAG legal evaluation,  the  reference  to  “lost  time”  on  the
applicant’s DD Form  214  is  not  dependent  upon  a  criminal  proceedings
outcome, but rather it is a matter of availability  to  fulfill  a  member’s
military obligation or duty and thus, creditable service.   It  remains  our
opinion that the three days of “lost time” were properly  annotated  on  his
DD Form 214.  In view of the above and absent persuasive  evidence  that  an
error or injustice exists in his record, that he was denied rights to  which
he was entitled, or that he was treated differently than similarly  situated
individuals, we find no compelling basis to recommend overturning the  prior
decisions to deny this appeal.

_________________________________________________________________

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-1982-01513
in Executive Session on 8 Nov 07 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Ms. Martha J. Evans, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member
                 Mr. Michael J. Novel, Member

The following documentary evidence relating to Docket  Number  BC-1982-01513
was considered:

   Exhibit P.  Record of Proceedings, dated 6 Jan 05,
               w/Exhibits.
   Exhibit Q.  Letter, Attorney, dated 17 Oct 07.




                                   MARTHA J. EVANS
                                   Panel Chair



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-1982-01513A

    Original file (BC-1982-01513A.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-1982-01513 INDEX CODE 123.04, 134.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: In his appeal for reconsideration, he asks that three days of lost time (1- 3 Nov 74), as well as information used by the Air Force to justify the lost time, be expunged from his DD Form 214 and records. In his...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-1999-01513

    Original file (BC-1999-01513.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-1999-01513 INDEX CODE: 135.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, he requests that the additional nonpaid Inactive Duty Training (IDT) points initially approved by the Board be changed to paid IDT points. The applicant’s complete...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1982 | BC 1982 02842 1

    Original file (BC 1982 02842 1.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    SECOND ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-1982-02842-2 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s original request and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings (ROP) at Exhibit F. On 20 Jul 83, the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-1982-02842-1

    Original file (BC-1982-02842-1.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    SECOND ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-1982-02842-2 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s original request and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings (ROP) at Exhibit F. On 20 Jul 83, the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-1992-01342-2

    Original file (BC-1992-01342-2.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The AFBCMR Staff assumed the applicant was referring to his most recent case (BC-2004-02624), which was denied on 27 Dec 04, and in a letter dated 3 May 06 (Exhibit K), requested he provide copies of documents he alluded to his 14 Feb 06 submission. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: After reviewing the applicant’s latest submissions, a majority of the Board reconsidered his appeal but found the documentation insufficient to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01415

    Original file (BC-2006-01415.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01415 INDEX NUMBER: 126.00;111.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 5 Nov 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Article 15 imposed on him on 3 Mar 03 be set aside and removed from his record. He did on or about 10 Jan 03, with intent to deceive, make to Security Forces...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-01427-3

    Original file (BC-2008-01427-3.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    By letter, dated 26 Jul 10, the applicant provided a response to the advisories; stating neither he or his attorney received copies of the Air Force evaluations and had the Board been provided the additional letters of support, with the recommended change to his OER closing 14 Feb 84, he believes the recommended change to the rater and additional rater comments would have rendered more positive results (Exhibit H). He attached previous correspondence from the AFBCMR staff; however, in this...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC 2008 01427 3

    Original file (BC 2008 01427 3.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    By letter, dated 26 Jul 10, the applicant provided a response to the advisories; stating neither he or his attorney received copies of the Air Force evaluations and had the Board been provided the additional letters of support, with the recommended change to his OER closing 14 Feb 84, he believes the recommended change to the rater and additional rater comments would have rendered more positive results (Exhibit H). He attached previous correspondence from the AFBCMR staff; however, in this...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00933

    Original file (BC-2005-00933.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00933 INDEX CODE: 106.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: Yes MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 19 Sep 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 1985 general discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 6 Nov 85, the commander recommended the applicant be separated with a general discharge for drug abuse. Accordingly, we recommend...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2005-03220

    Original file (BC-2005-03220.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ RESUME OF CASE: On 25 Apr 06, the Board considered and denied applicant’s original request for direct promotion to lieutenant colonel and continuation on active duty in that grade until 31 Mar 97. For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the rationale of the decision by the Board, see the Addendum to the ROP at Exhibit N. In his latest submission, dated 6 Sep 09, the applicant requests reconsideration of...