RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04322 

 

 COUNSEL: 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His general (under honorable conditions) discharge 
characterization be changed to honorable and his grade of airman 
basic (AB/E-1) be changed to senior airman (SrA/E-4). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

His discharge characterization is contradictory in comparison to 
his record of conduct during military service. He was a good 
airman and is proud to have served. He has been employed for 
the last 25 years and has recently lost his job. Since his 
discharge and after many years of being employed, he did not 
realize the impact the discharge characterization would have on 
employment opportunities or he would have requested it earlier. 

 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of his 
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, issued in conjunction with his 21 Dec 83 separation and 
extracts from his military personnel record, including training 
certificates and performance evaluations. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 12 Feb 80 for 
a period of four years. He was progressively promoted to the 
grade of SrA, with an effective date and Date of Rank of 
1 Feb 83. 

 

The squadron commander initiated administrative discharge action 
against the applicant, on 6 Dec 83, for a pattern of misconduct. 
The specific reasons for the proposed action were: 

 

 1. On or about 1 Jul 80, the applicant was cited for 
speeding in his privately-owned vehicle (POV), 68 miles per hour 


(MPH) in a 35 MPH zone and failure to yield. He was arrested by 
civilian authorities and received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR). 

 

 2. He received two TAC Forms 27, Record of Individual 
Counseling, for being late two days in a row and failure to meet 
AFR 35-10 standards. 

 

 3. He received an Article 15 for wrongful use of 
tetrahydrocannabinol, a scheduled I controlled substance. His 
punishment consisted of a suspended reduction in grade to airman 
first class (A1C/E-3) and correctional custody for 30 days. 

 

 4. He received an Article 15 for being derelict in 
the performance of his duties by willfully failing to provide 
his own urine specimen. For this offense, his suspended 
reduction to A1C was vacated and he was reduced to AB. 

 

 5. He received a letter from Social Actions for 
failure to rehabilitate. 

 

On 7 Dec 83, after consulting with counsel, the applicant waived 
his right to submit statements in his own behalf. The staff 
judge advocate recommended discharge, without probation and 
rehabilitation (P&R). The discharge authority approved the 
general discharge without P&R. 

 

The applicant was discharged, on 21 Dec 83, under the provisions 
of AFR 39-10, by reason of misconduct – pattern of discreditable 
involvement with military and civilian authorities, with service 
characterized as general (under honorable conditions). He was 
credited with 3 years, 10 months, and 10 days of active duty 
service. 

 

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, indicated based on 
data furnished; they are unable to locate an arrest record. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 find no evidence of an error or injustice 
that occurred during the discharge process. Based on the 
available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was 
consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge 


regulation and within the commander's discretionary authority. 
The applicant has provided no evidence which would lead us to 
believe the characterization of the service was contrary to the 
provisions of the governing regulation, unduly harsh, or 
disproportionate to the offenses committed. The applicant 
provided a statement and extracts from his military personnel 
record in support of his appeal to have his discharge upgraded 
based on clemency; however, considering his overall record of 
service and the seriousness of the offenses which led to his 
administrative separation, we are not persuaded that an upgrade 
of the characterization of his discharge is warranted. 
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find 
no basis upon which to recommend granting the relief sought. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2010-04322 in Executive Session on 19 July 2011, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Nov 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair