RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02858
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded
to honorable.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was unjustly discharged for following orders. While on duty
as an engine mechanic, he was inspecting two aircraft engines
and was asked to report to the officers golf course by his
Sergeant. He had not completed the work order and the aircraft
inspection as not completed. However, his Sergeant told him to
sign the work order and he would take care of it the next day.
He was uncomfortable with this, but knew to follow orders of
superiors. A week later, a hearing was held and he was charged
with signing the work order prior to completion of the
inspection. His Sergeant and another Airman lied and stated
that they did not give the order to sign the paperwork prior to
inspection completion.
He is still angry and saddened that following orders ultimately
got him kicked out of the military. Since leaving the military,
he served as a Deputy Sheriff for 21 years and his now retired.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on
26 Feb 58.
On 1 Nov 60, the applicant was furnished an general (under
honorable conditions) discharge, and was credited with 2 years,
8 months, and 21 days of active service.
On 30 Jul 14, a request for post-service information was
forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30
days (Exhibit C). In response, the applicant provided a
character reference letter (Exhibit D).
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-2014-02858 in Executive Session on 16 Apr 15, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2014-02858 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 03 Jul 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Jul 14.
Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atch.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00980
When determining if a person qualifies for CRSC due to tinnitus, the board looks for: 1) documentation confirming instances of direct exposure to a combat-related acoustic trauma, and, 2) confirmation the condition manifested while in service. Hearing Loss and Tinnitus Disability Benefits Questionnaire, dated 13 Dec 12, indicates a diagnosis of hearing loss; there is only a reference to the applicants report that he noticed tinnitus just prior to retirement. However, this document is...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02858
Current timelines for submitting decorations is two years from the date of the act or achievement. Under this Act, which lifted the time limitations on submitting award recommendations, veterans who may make a case for award consideration (or upgrade of a previously awarded decoration) not previously eligible because of these time limits, may now submit for award consideration. Novel, Panel Chair Ms. Judith B. Oliva, Member Mr. Don H. Kendrick, Member The following documentary evidence was...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01196
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. They believe that supervisors and commanding officers at the time were in a better position to evaluate the applicant’s potential and eligibility for promotion, and the applicant’s delay regarding a matter now dating back over 62 years has greatly complicated their ability to determine the merits of his position. The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03168
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03168 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His grade of Staff Sergeant (SSgt/E-5), with a Date of Rank of 1 Jul 72, be restored. On 1 Jul 72, he was progressively promoted to the grade of SSgt. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice in the processing of the Article 15.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03836
However, his chain of command fabricated two additional LORs in order to involuntarily dismiss him from the military, and then denied his reenlistment in Mar 12. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility which is included at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02327
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02327 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. Block 25a, Specialty Number and Title, be corrected to reflect he was awarded the 43151C (Journeyman Aircraft Mechanic) air force specialty code (AFSC). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR),...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01191
In support of his appeal, the applicant submitted a personal letter to the board and states the USAF lost all of his personnel records when they sent him from Kadena AFB to Maxwell AFB for Retirement. Examiners Note: On 27 May 14 an inquiry letter was sent to AFPC/DPAPP requesting to adjust their advisory opinion in the following manner: The applicants AF Form 7, Page 92 of his records reflects that he was in combat mission in Vietnam on 18 Oct 67. With respect to his request for his...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03077
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03077 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be considered for supplemental promotion to the grade of Master Sergeant (MSgt) by the Cycle 95E7 promotion board. The applicant's request for supplemental promotion consideration for cycle 95E7 was denied by AFPC/DPPPW (Enlisted Promotions) on 21 Aug 95 due to noncompliance with AF policy (AFI 36-2502,...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02429
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02429 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2B (Separated with general or under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge) be changed to allow him to renter the military. He received a RE code of 2B (Separated with a general or UOTHC discharge), based on his general discharge. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR,...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01480
The information provided by the applicant and a review of his master personnel records did not contain information that reflects he served in Vietnam. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPAPP 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 24 Nov 14 for review and comment within 30 days. DECISION OF THE BOARD: The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the interest of justice to waive...