RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04369 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of 
duty and he overslept and missed a scheduled flight. It was his 
first time missing a flight and/or being late for work. He is 
not making light of what he did; however, this was an isolated 
incident. Since his discharge in 1995, he has worked at the 
Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations Plant for 11 years, he 
coaches a softball team at work, several youth basketball, 
baseball and flag football teams and he is an active member in 
church. He has been married for 10 years with three children and 
one grandchild. Giving his life to the Lord has been the turning 
point in his life. He states he is a new man and desires his 
discharge upgraded. He loved and enjoyed serving his country. 
His goal was to respectfully retire from the Air Force. 

 

In support of the applicant’s appeal, he provides a personal 
statement, character reference letters, and documents extracted 
from his military personnel records. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

A discharge package was not available in the applicant’s military 
personnel records (MPR). The facts surrounding his separation 
cannot be verified. The available records reveal the following. 

 

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 6 October 
1988. 

 

 

 


On or about 11 June 1994, the applicant did without authority, 
fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty. 
For this misconduct the applicant received nonjudicial punishment 
under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). 
His punishment consisted of a suspended reduction in grade from 
senior airman to airman first class and a forfeiture of 
$258.00 pay. 

 

On or about 11 August 1994 to 29 September 1994, he dishonorably 
failed to pay a debt. 

 

On 18 October 1994, the suspended reduction in grade to airman 
first class imposed by Article 15 was vacated. 

 

The applicant was discharged on 25 September 1995 with a general 
(under honorable conditions) discharge under the provisions of 
AFI 36-3208 (Misconduct). He served 6 years, 11 months and 
20 days on active duty. 

 

Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation indicated that on the basis of the data furnished, 
they were 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, the Board majority finds 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, considering that for service to be 
characterized as honorable it should be meritorious, the Board 
majority finds the evidence provided insufficient to recommend 
granting the relief on that basis. Therefore, in the absence of 
evidence to the contrary, the Board majority recommends denial of 
the relief sought. 

_________________________________________________________________ 


 

RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: 

 

The majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of error or 
injustice and recommends the application be denied. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2011-04369 in Executive Session on 28 June 2012, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 

By a majority vote, the Board recommended denial of the 
application. XXX voted to grant the applicant’s request 
and provided a minority report. The following documentary 
evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-04369 was 
considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 November 2011, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Minority Report, dated 23 July 2012.