RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03370 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

1. His (general) under honorable conditions discharge be 
upgraded to honorable. 

 

2. His Narrative Reason for Separation be changed from 
Unsuitability – Apathy, Defective Attitude. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

In order to advance in his career he needs his discharge upgraded 
and the narrative reason changed. He regrets how he handled the 
situation. His behavior was influenced by the company he kept. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his 
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, a Standard Form (SF) 50, Notification of Personnel Action, 
his resume’, and copies of his college transcripts. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 16 Nov 81, the applicant contracted his enlistment in the 
Regular Air Force. He served as an Aerospace Control and Warning 
Systems Operator. 

 

On 7 Jun 82, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was 
recommending his discharge from the Air Force for unsuitability. 
The specific reasons for the discharge action were that he 
received two Article 15s for failure to go and stealing, a letter 
of Reprimand (LOR) regarding his conduct at the base club and 
dormitory, placement on the control roster for conduct that was 
incompatible with Air Force standards, and counselings for 
failure to report and his personal appearance. 

 


His commander advised him of his rights in this matter and on 
7 Jun 82, he acknowledged receipt of the notification for 
discharge. 

 

On 7 Jun 82, an evaluation officer was appointed to evaluate the 
applicant’s case. On 8 Jun 82, the evaluation officer interviewed 
the applicant and reviewed his records and case file. The 
evaluation officer recommended on 14 Jun 82 the applicant be 
separated with a general discharge without probation and 
rehabilitation. 

 

The legal office reviewed the case and concurs with the findings 
and recommendations of the evaluation officer that the applicant 
be furnished a general discharge without probation and 
rehabilitation. 

 

On 23 Jun 82, the discharge authority concurred with the 
commander’s recommendation and directed the applicant be 
furnished a general (under honorable conditions) discharge 
without probation and rehabilitation. 

 

On 25 Jun 82, the applicant was furnished a general (under 
honorable conditions) discharge and he was credited with 
7 months, and 10 days of active service. 

 

The applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board 
(AFDRB) to have his discharge upgraded to honorable. The AFDRB 
denied the applicant’s appeal on 29 May 84 noting there was no 
legal or equitable basis for an upgrade of the applicant’s 
discharge. 

 

On 14 Nov 11, the Board staff requested the applicant provide 
documentation concerning his activities since leaving military 
service (Exhibit D). 

 

In response, the applicant states he has grown as a person and 
notes his educational and professional accomplishments. The 
applicant’s complete response with attachments is at Exhibit E. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 in the discharge processing. 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 and narrative reason 
for separation was contrary to the provisions of the governing 
regulation, unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses 
committed. We also considered upgrading the discharge based on 
clemency; however, the applicant has not submitted evidence that 
shows a successful post-service adjustment. 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-2011-03370 in Executive Session on 12 Apr 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Aug 11. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Military Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 2 Nov 11, w/atch. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 15 Nov 11, w/atchs. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair