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.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was promoted to the rank of SSgt, within three and half years;
however, after several run-ins with his squadron commander, he
lost his position on the flight line and eventually, gave up his
SSgt rank for an early separation.
The Board should find it in the interest of justice to consider
his untimely application because he has wanted to address this
issue for many years now.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 30 Jan 69, the applicant initially entered the Regular Air
Force for a period of four years. On 1 Jul 72, he was
progressively promoted to the grade of SSgt. On 7 Aug 72, the
applicant reenlisted in the Regular Air Force.
On 11 Feb 74, the applicant received an Article 15, for being
Absent Without Leave (AWOL), on or about 2 7 Jan 74. His
punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of sergeant with
a DOR of 11 Feb 74. He did not appeal the punishment.
On 17 Jul 74, the applicant was furnished an honorable discharge,
and was credited with 5 years, 5 months, and 10 days of active
service.
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.
JAJM notes that, in this case, from on or about 2 Jan 74 to on or
about 7 Jan 74, the applicant was absent without leave. For the
alleged wrongdoing, the applicants commander offered him
Nonjudicial Punishment (NJP) on 11 Feb 74. The NJP paperwork
indicates the applicant accepted NJP proceedings and submitted a
written presentation. On 9 Mar 74, the applicants commander
found that the applicant committed the offense and punished him by
reducing him to the grade of Sergeant. The applicant was notified
of his right to appeal and chose not to appeal.
In his response to the NJP, the applicant admits to not being at
work, but states he could not make it back because of bad snow
storms. He states that he tried to call his command to let them
know about his inability to make it back to work. For similar
misconduct the applicant had also received prior counseling. The
applicant was afforded due process and was given the opportunity
to submit matters in mitigation, extenuation, or defense. The
commander at the time would have been the best person to evaluate
the evidence and make a decision on the appropriateness of the
action. The applicant was given due process and given his
history, the punishment was not too severe.
Additionally, the requested relief cannot be accomplished
administratively. The application was received approximately
41 years since the NJP action was completed. The application is
untimely. Moreover, we do not see that it is in the interest of
justice to consider the application. The applicant has the burden
of proof in this case and in our opinion, he has not supported his
claims with sufficient evidence.
The complete JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPSOE deferred their recommendation, noting the evaluation
and recommendation from AFLOA/JAJM is to deny the applicants
request to set aside the Article 15 punishment.
In addition, DPSOE noted the application was untimely and that he
has exhausted his administrative remedies.
The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit D.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant refutes the point about being AWOL and argues that
due to a snowstorm he was not able to return to the base; however,
he was able to contact someone on the base who agreed to let his
chain of command know of his whereabouts.
The applicant reiterates his original contentions and truly
believes had it not been for his squadron commander, he probably
would have made a career in the Air Force. His past record of
achievements was clean and his accomplishments throughout his
almost six years are well documented.
The applicants complete response, with attachments, is at
Exhibit F.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD:
After careful consideration of applicants request and the
available evidence of record, we find the application untimely.
The 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. The
applicant has not shown a plausible reason for the delay in
filing, and we are not persuaded 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-2014-03168 in Executive Session on 7 May 15 under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 Aug 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Pertinent Excerpts from Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 23 Feb 15.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 27 Feb 15.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Mar 15.
Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 26 Mar 15.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01954
With that perspective, the commander exercised the discretion that the applicant granted him when the applicant accepted the Article 15 and found nonjudicial punishment appropriate in this case. The applicant’s case has undergone an exhaustive review by the Air Force office of primary responsibility and AFLOA/JAJM; however, other than his own assertions, the applicant has not presented any evidence that the commander abused his discretionary authority in imposing the nonjudicial punishment....
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00732
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 D. _______________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLOA/JAJM recommends the Board deny the applicant’s request as untimely or on the merits. He also claims that the Numbered Air Force returned the Article 15 action because of the punishment's severity. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05071
The Letter of Counseling (LOC), dated 7 Sep 10; LOC, dated 18 Feb 11; Letter of Reprimand (LOR), dated 28 Mar 11; LOC, dated 28 Mar 11; and LOC, dated 15 Jun 11 be removed from her official military personnel records. FINDING (As amended by AFGSC/IG): NOT SUBSTANTIATED The applicants commander removed the 18 Feb 11 LOR from the applicants military personnel records as a result of the substantiated finding of reprisal in the AFGSC/IG Report. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00653
________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial, stating, in part, that based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge to include the character of service was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFLOA/JAJM recommends approval,...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05137
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05137 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His selection for promotion to the grade of master sergeant (E-7) during cycle 13E7 be reinstated. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant provides two new documents in support of his arguments: a memo for record from the first...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00597
In a letter from his commander, dated 24 Dec 72, paragraph 1m. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force, which are at Exhibit B and C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE defers their recommendation by stating the applicant was promoted to sergeant on 1 Jun 71 and received a reduction to airman first class on 31 Dec 71. He was...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02657
According to the DD Form 214, on 2 Aug 13, the applicant was discharged for Misconduct (Minor Infractions) with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions) in the grade of airman first class. The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit B. AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial of the applicants requests to change his RE code to 1# indicating the applicant does not provide any proof of an error or injustice in reference to his RE code 2B, but states he was unjustly discharged. THE...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01771
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01771 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. Between the date of his reduction to the grade of Amn (27 Jan 04) and his last day on active duty (31 Dec 04), the applicant held no higher grade than Amn. Based on the applicants date of rank (DOR) to SSgt during cycle 94A5, he was...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04036
On 12 Jul 11, while again a technical sergeant, the applicants commander offered him NJP under Article 15 of the UCMJ for willfully failing to properly handle classified information by storing a classified briefing marked NATO SECRET REL ISAF on his personal computer. We note that the commander exercised the discretion that the applicant granted him when he accepted the Article 15 and found nonjudicial punishment appropriate in his case, the punishment decision was well within the limits...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03205
On 28 May 14, the applicants commander notified him he was being considered for nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15. AFLOA/JAJMs position to deny the applicants request is supported; however, if the Board determines an error or injustice has occurred, and elects to restore the grade of master sergeant (E-7), the appropriate date of rank and effective date is 1 Feb 11. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence...