RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02829
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His name be included in the official list of United States Air
Force Academy (USAFA) graduates, class of 1966.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was judged too harshly after self-admitting to an honor code
violation and should have been given a second chance to continue
on to graduation. During his third-year, alone in a classroom, he
was about to turn in a test when he looked at another cadets test
on the instructors desk. He changed his answer to one question
based on the answer seen on the other cadets test. At the
beginning of his fourth-year, his fellow cadets appointed him to
the honor committee. More than a year after the answer-changing
occurred, he self-admitted to this one-time error in judgment. He
believes, because he was now an honor committee representative,
his punishment was more severe than other cadets received for
similar offenses. He had personally witnessed several cadets
receive second chances for incidents like his; first-offense,
self-reported, and minor in nature. Further, there was no appeal
process, at the time, and he had no option other than resignation.
He notes current honor violation procedures at the USAFA appear to
provide second chances and believes he deserves one too.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 25 Jun 63, the applicant entered the USAFA.
On 5 Apr 66, the applicant voluntarily tendered his resignation as
a cadet appointed to USAFA.
On 25 Apr 66, the applicants separation from the USAFA was
approved, with an honorable character of service.
On 28 Apr 66, according to the DD Form 785, Record of
Disenrollment from Officer Candidate-Type Training, the applicant
was disenrolled for breach of Cadet Honor Code. The specific act
was self-admitted cheating. The approval authority commended his
personal integrity and recommended him for future officer training
On 12 Aug 13, according to information provided by the applicant,
he wrote to the USAFA Commandant of Cadets, requesting inclusion
to the USAFA list of graduates for the class of 1966.
On 20 Nov 13, according to information provided by the applicant,
the USAFA Commandant of Cadets replied to the applicant directly,
explaining the presumptive punishment for honor violations and the
evolution of discretion and probation as they relate to possible
alternatives to disenrollment from the USAFA. The Commandant of
Cadets subsequently referred the applicant to the AFBCMR process.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are
contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of
primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
USAFA/A1A, in coordination with the Director of Student Affairs
and Academy Registrar Office, recommends denial, indicating there
is no evidence of an error or an injustice. USAFAI 36-3504,
Disenrollment of United States Air Force Academy Cadets, dated
21 Aug 13 states violations of the Cadet Wing Honor Code will
normally be processed according to procedures in the USAFA Cadet
Wing Honor Code Reference Handbook. According to the USAFA Cadet
Wing Honor Code Reference Handbook, the presumptive sanction for
an honor violation is disenrollment; only under extraordinary
circumstances may a lesser sanction be recommended. The decision
of the applicants Honor Board was to support that presumptive
sanction. Further, the applicant voluntarily resigned prior to
graduation. By resigning, the applicant did not complete USAFA's
graduation requirements and therefore did not earn a degree from
the USAFA and commission in the Air Force.
A complete copy of the USAFA/A1A evaluation is at Exhibit C.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant does not refute the matter of record of his
disenrollment; however, he affirms the severity of the punishment
is the injustice. He highlights the unfairness of not getting a
second chance and USAFAs lack of an appeal process, at the time
of his disenrollment. He states he has completed his degree and
volunteers to complete the final sixty days of cadet time to
fulfill any remaining obligation as a USAFA cadet.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD:
After careful consideration of applicants request and the
available evidence of record, we find the application untimely.
Applicant did not file within three years after the alleged error
or injustice was discovered as required by Title 10, United States
Code, Section 1552 and Air Force Instruction 36-2603. Applicant
has not shown a plausible reason for the delay in filing, and we
are not persuaded that the record raises issues of error or
injustice which require resolution on the merits. Thus, we cannot
conclude it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the
applicants failure to file in a timely manner.
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the
interest of justice to waive the untimeliness. It is the decision
of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as untimely.
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number
BC-2014-02829 in Executive Session on 25 Mar 15 under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Jun 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, USAFA/A1A, dated 7 Jan 15.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Jan 15.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 12 Feb 15, w/atchs.
On 29 Sep 98, the Secretary of the Air Force approved the recommendation of the United States Air Force Academy Superintendent to disenroll applicant and directed that he be honorably separated from cadet status, transferred to the Air Force Reserve and ordered to active duty for a period of three years. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Staff Judge Advocate, HQ USAFA/JA, stated that the applicant was disenrolled from the Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-04030
In this case, although the applicant argued this was a “Self-Report”, the voting members of the CSRP, based on the evidence presented to them, determined the case was an “Admit”, and there is sufficient evidence in the file to support their findings and recommendations. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice to warrant changing the applicant’s USAFA Cadet Wing Honor Code violation to “Self-Report.” After a thorough review...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01674
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01674 INDEX CODE: 104.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 4 Dec 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The DD Form 785, Record of Disenrollment From Officer Candidate-Type Training, dated 29 Jun 05, be amended by changing the words in Section III to reflect “Cadet P voluntarily resigned while...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03934
The alleged discrepancies are: a) he was improperly advised on his right to counsel, b) the violation the applicant was found guilty of was different than the original honor violation cited in the letter of notification, c) the violation was mischaracterized by the Cadet Sanctions Recommendation Panel (CSRP) making it appear more egregious to the USAFA chain of command, d) the CSRP failed to fully address the "forthrightness" factor, saying it was not significant, e) the CSRP failed to...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03587
However, they do recommend the applicant’s record be corrected to show that the time of his disenrollment he was on conduct probation not academic probation. HQ USAFA/JA opines the applicant was not prejudiced by the error and that the applicant was disenrolled for his Wing Honor Code violations The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant’s counsel states in his response that...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01986
The applicant was disenrolled from the USAFA on 23 Mar 05. The AOC admitted to informing the applicant that he was being recommended for disenrollment for failing probation but denies being vindictive or ordering the applicant to submit his resignation. Based on the fact that he was scheduled to meet a MRC for failing Aptitude and Conduct probation, was recommended for disenrollment for failing Honor probation, and had six different instances of documented adverse actions, there is enough...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02250
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02250 INDEX NUMBER: 104.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: Dartt J. Demaree HEARING DESIRED: Yes MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 24 Feb 08 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The finding that he violated the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA) (Academy) Cadet Honor Code be voided. Counsel states that the statement that no new evidence...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00747
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00747 INDEX CODE: 104.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Record of Disenrollment from Officer Candidate - Type Training (DD Form 785) Section III be changed as follows: 1. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records,...
His disenrollment was primarily caused by his conviction for an honor violation by the Wing Honor Board (WHB) although his WHB conviction had been set aside due to irregularities and should not have been considered as a factor in his disenrollment. The Superintendent, after reviewing the recommendations from the MRC, Commandant of Cadets and the Academy Board, also recommended applicant’s disenrollment. We note that one of the applicant’s commanding officers clearly indicates in his...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02032
The Article 15 action does not mean that a cadet must be disenrolled. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: USAFA/JA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. While his enlisted service is commendable, it does not provide a basis for reinstatement to USAFA.