Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00219
Original file (BC-2010-00219.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2010-00219
            INDEX CODE:  110.00; 110.02
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The  narrative  reason  for  separation  -  “Unsuitable   Apathy   Defective
Attitude” and the separation code of SPD-JMJ be removed  from  his  DD  Form
214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His  DD  Form  214  unfairly  portrays  him  as  defective  in  personality,
character and unmotivated to proudly serve in the military.

In support of his request, the applicant submits a copy of his DD  Form  214
and several character reference letters.

The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 1 Dec 78.

On 9 Apr 80, the applicant’s commander notified the applicant that  she  was
recommending the applicant  be  separated  from  the  Air  Force  under  the
provisions of AFM 39-12, Separation for Unsuitability, Misconduct,  Personal
Abuse of Drugs; Resignation or Request for Discharge for  the  Good  of  the
Service; and Procedures for the Rehabilitation Program, Chapter  2,  Section
A, paragraph 2-4c, for apathy and defective attitude.  Her reasons  were  as
follows:

      1)  Between Jan 80  and  Feb  80,  the  applicant  received  five  (5)
Letters of Reprimand (LOR); two for  failure  to  meet  standards;  two  for
failure to attend standboard evaluations; and one for sleeping on duty.

      2)  On 9 Jan 80, he was placed on the Control Roster  for  failure  to
report to duty on time.

      3)  On 17 Jan 80, he received an Article 15 for being  Absent  Without
Leave (AWOL) from 14 to 16 Jan 80.  He received  a  suspended  reduction  to
airman and was ordered to forfeit $50 per months for two months.

The  applicant  acknowledged  receipt  of  the   notification   and,   after
consulting military legal counsel, submitted a statement in his own  behalf.
 The commander thereafter initiated a  recommendation  for  the  applicant’s
separation.  The Deputy and Staff Judge  Advocate  found  the  case  legally
sufficient and recommended the applicant’s discharge without  probation  and
rehabilitation. The discharge authority approved the  recommended  discharge
and directed the applicant be issued an Honorable Discharge Certificate.

The applicant was discharged on 16 May 80.  He served 1 year,  5 months  and
13 days on active duty.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted  from
the applicant’s military records, are contained in the  letter  prepared  by
the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial.  DPSOS states the applicant’s  petition  is
untimely.  DPSOS notes it has been more than 30 years  since  his  discharge
from the Air Force and he does not  explain  why  he  did  not  address  the
alleged error or injustice within three years of his discharge.

DPSOS states no errors or injustices in  the  processing  of  the  discharge
action were found.  Based  on  the  documentation  on  file  in  the  master
personnel record, the discharge to include the characterization  of  service
was consistent with the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements  of  the
discharge instruction  and  was  within  the  discretion  of  the  discharge
authority.  In addition, the  applicant  did  not  submit  any  evidence  or
identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge process.

The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on  1  Oct
10, for review and comment within 30 days.  As of  this  date,  this  office
has received no response (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

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 opinion and recommendation of  the  Air  Force  office  of  primary
responsibility and adopt its 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  basis  to  recommend
granting the  relief  sought  in  this  application.   However,  should  the
applicant  provide  additional  information   (i.e.,   character   reference
letters, community involvement, etc.) to show he has experienced  successful
post-service since his discharge  from  service,  we  would  be  willing  to
reconsider his request.

_______________________________________________________________

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 this application in  Executive
Session on 9 Nov 10, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Panel Chair
      Member
      Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in BC-2010-00219:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, undated, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSOS, dated 8 Sep 10.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Oct 10.



                                   JANET I. HASSAN
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00579

    Original file (BC-2012-00579.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 8 Apr 80, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for unsuitability, apathy and defective attitude, or inability to expend effort constructively. The complete AFPC/DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 27 Apr 12, for review and comment within 30 days. Based on...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03508

    Original file (BC-2004-03508.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    ___________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 20 Jun 77, for a period of four years in the grade of airman basic. He recommended applicant be discharged from the Air Force with a general discharge and that he be considered for rehabilitation under the provisions of AFM 39-12, Chapter 4. Applicant was discharged on 11 Jul 80, in the grade of airman, under the provisions of AFM 39-12, Unsuitable-Apathy,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02695

    Original file (BC-2005-02695.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02695 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 28 FEB 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01463

    Original file (BC-2005-01463.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01463 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 6 JANUARY 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded. On 22 May 80, the discharge authority directed the applicant be discharged and issued a General...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-00826

    Original file (BC-1998-00826.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Evaluation in the disability evaluation system should have followed where the most likely recommendation would have been unfit for duty. A complete copy of the Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C. The Physical Disability Division, AFPC/DPPD, reviewed this application and recommended denial. A complete copy of the DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9800826

    Original file (9800826.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The fact is, the applicant presented himself to mental health services during his period of service with apparently bonafide evidence of psychotic hallucinations/behavior and this was not considered in his discharge processing. A complete copy of the DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on 17 Aug 98 for review and response....

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04336

    Original file (BC 2013 04336.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04336 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an Honorable. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the applicant’s general (under honorable conditions) discharge for unsuitability was consistent with the substantive...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02854

    Original file (BC-2006-02854.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02854 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: Mar 24, 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03103

    Original file (BC-2007-03103.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-03103 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NOT INDICATED HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His characterization of service be upgraded from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. We considered...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01197

    Original file (BC-2004-01197.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01197 INDEX CODE 100.06, 107.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214 be corrected to reflect (1) a Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code that allows reenlistment, (2) additional time served, and (3) receipt of the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award (AFOUA), the Expert...