RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04181 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to 
honorable. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

During the contested time period, she was young, in an abusive 
relationship, made mistakes and did not perform as an airman. 
She desires her discharge be upgraded in order to receive 
education benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill. She would like 
to further her education and career. 

 

In support of her request, the applicant submits a copy of 
DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge from the 
Armed Forces of the United States, copy of her 2010 appraisal, 
and copies of SF 50, Notification of Personnel Action. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 14 May 1993. 

 

The applicant was notified by her commander of his intent to 
recommend her discharge from the Air Force under the provisions 
of AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208. The specific reasons follow: 

 

 a. The applicant was delinquent on her American Express 
Government Card for over 90 days. 

 

 b. On 26 March 1995, the applicant displayed conduct 
unbecoming of an airman in the United States Air Force for simple 
assault. 

 

 c. On 14 April 1995, the applicant displayed conduct 
unbecoming of an airman in the United States Air Force for a 


second time within a month for simple assault. Furthermore, she 
violated the curfew for individuals residing in the dormitory. 

 

 d. On 1 June 1995, the applicant wrote two checks which were 
returned due to insufficient funds in her checking account. 

 

 e. On 26 June 1995, the applicant failed her end of course 
examination for the first time with a score of 59. 

 

 f. On 26 September 1995, she failed her end of course 
examination for the second time with a score of 64 

 

She was advised of her rights in this matter and elected to 
submit a statement in her own behalf. In a legal review of the 
case file, the acting staff judge advocate found the case legally 
sufficient and recommended discharge. The discharge authority 
concurred with the recommendation and directed a general (under 
honorable conditions) discharge. The applicant was discharged on 
22 December 1995. She served 2 years, 7 months and 9 days on 
active duty. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 was contrary to the 
provisions of the governing regulation, unduly harsh, or 
disproportionate to the offenses committed. In the interest of 
justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; 
however, there was no evidence submitted to compel us to 
recommend granting the relief sought on that basis. Therefore, 
in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to 
recommend granting the relief sought. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 


 

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2011-04181 in Executive Session on 30 May 2012, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2011-04181 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 October 2011, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.