Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02843
Original file (BC 2013 02843.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-02843

		COUNSEL: NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be 
upgraded to Honorable.  

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He believes, as his command did at the time of his discharge, 
that his service was exemplary and honorable.  

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at 
Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant’s military personnel records indicate he enlisted 
in the Regular Air Force on 24 Mar 99.

On 17 Mar 03, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was 
recommending his discharge from the Air Force for an action 
tantamount to a finding of guilty by civilian authorities.  The 
reasons for the action were as follows:

	a.  On 27 Feb 03, the applicant entered a Pre-trial 
Diversion Agreement, wherein he acknowledged there was strong 
evidence indicating that on 25 Jul 00, he used an interactive 
computer service to transport obscene matter, specifically 
images of child pornography.  The prosecution of the offense was 
deferred for 12 months and he agreed to a number of conditions, 
which, if fulfilled, would result in the dismissal of charges at 
the end of the 12-month deferral period.

	b.  On 13 Nov 02, the applicant was indicted on one count 
of transportation of obscene matter, specifically images of 
child pornography.

On 9 Apr 03, the applicant was furnished a UOTHC discharge with 
a narrative reason for separation of “Administrative Discharge.” 
He was credited with 4 years and 15 days of total active 
service.

On 1 Mar 05, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) 
reviewed the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge, but 
denied the request indicating the discharge was consistent with 
the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge 
regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge 
authority.  Additionally, the applicant was provided full 
administrative due process and there was no legal or equitable 
basis to upgrade the discharge.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or an injustice.  Based on the documentation on file in 
the master personnel records, the discharge, to include the 
service characterization, was appropriately administered and 
within the discretion of the discharge authority.  While the 
applicant’s desire to serve his country is admirable; it does 
not change the serious nature or basis (child pornography) for 
which he was discharged and the applicant has not provided any 
evidence of an error or injustice to warrant the requested 
change to his character of service.  The applicant’s separation 
code of “JKN” should be corrected to reflect “JKB” and narrative 
reason for separation should be corrected to reflect “Misconduct 
– (Civil Conviction),” instead of “Administrative Discharge.” 
The applicant’s character of service should not change.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR 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 18 Oct 13 for review and comment within 30 days.  
As of this date, no response has been received by this office 
(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 an 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 
(OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion 
the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice.  
We note the Air Force OPR has verified the applicant’s records 
erroneously reflect a separation program designator (SPD) code 
and narrative reason for separation of “JKN” and “Misconduct – 
(Civil Conviction),” respectively, and will correct his records 
administratively.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the 
contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting any relief 
beyond that rendered administratively.

________________________________________________________________

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 relevant evidence not considered with this 
application.

________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2013-02843 in Executive Session on 18 Mar 14, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

		                     , Panel Chair
		                     , Member
		                     , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 Apr 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPFD, dated 22 Aug 13.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Oct 13.




                                   
                                   Panel Chair
3

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | bc 2013 02696

    Original file (bc 2013 02696.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial of the applicant’s request to change his characterization of service. AFPC/DPSOY will provide the applicant with a corrected copy of his DD Form 214 with a RE code of 2B, unless otherwise directed by the Board. Regarding his request to change his RE code, we note that DPSOA states his RE code was recorded in error and we agree with their recommendation to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00492

    Original file (BC 2014 00492.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He served 21 years and 1 day of active duty in the Air Force and submitted a request for retirement which was not processed due to an administrative discharge action. On 31 Aug 13, the applicant was honorably discharged and he was credited with 21 years and 10 days of active duty service. The applicant requested retirement on two occasions, properly completing and submitting his application, only to have his applications for retirement denied.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01998

    Original file (BC 2014 01998.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01998 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The following items on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be corrected: a. The applicant’s DD Form 214 reflects a Separation Code of “JKN” and a Reentry Code of “2B” The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501478

    Original file (ND0501478.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). As the representative, we ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to include any issue upon which the applicant submits to the Board’s discretionary authority, under SECNAVIST 5420.174D. On 20020515, the Applicant...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02335

    Original file (BC 2014 02335.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 6 Apr 12, the Discharge Review Board (DRB) denied the applicant’s requests to upgrade his discharge, change his narrative reason for separation and RE code. A complete copy of the AFLOA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial as it pertains to the applicant’s request to change the SPD code, narrative reason for separation, and character of service. Therefore, as the applicant has presented no evidence to indicate that the commander abused his discretionary...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03086

    Original file (BC-2002-03086.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 14 Jul 00, the applicant was notified by his Wing Commander that he was considering whether to recommend to the Numbered Air Force (NAF) Commander that he be punished under Article 15 for alleged misconduct in violation of Article 92, Uniform Code of Military Justice, in that he did on divers occasions, between on or about 9 Nov 99 and on or about 25 Jan 00, fail to obey a lawful general regulation, to wit: paragraph 6, Air Force Instruction 33-129, Transmission of Information via the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02843

    Original file (BC-2007-02843.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 9 Aug 82, he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for failing to report for duty at the appointed place and time. d. On 15 Sep 82, he received an LOC for failing to adequately support his dependent. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00375

    Original file (BC 2014 00375.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 9 Aug 02, the applicant's commander notified him that he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for commission of a serious crime, specifically one or more indecent acts or offenses with a child under the age of 16. They 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 the applicant was provided full administrative due process. DPSOR found no...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02975

    Original file (BC-2012-02975.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant’s military personnel records indicate he enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 03 Feb 09. Airmen are given entry-level separation with uncharacterized service when separation is initiated within the first 180 days of continuous active service. While the applicant’s military personnel records indicate that he was erroneously issued an RE code of 4C, his correct RE code should be...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02037

    Original file (BC 2013 02037.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of documents extracted from his military personnel records pertaining to matter at hand, and an excerpt from Air Force Instruction (AFI), 36-2606, Reenlistment in the United States Air Force. Under the provisions of the AFI, a service member receiving a 1J RE code is eligible to reenlist; however, the AFI also states the service member is allowed to reenlist if he is otherwise eligible, must be present for duty, and will not reenlist...