RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02037
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 30 DEC 08
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to an
honorable discharge.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He has been out of the military for over 16 years and has been an attribute
to society. He has no felonies or misdemeanors.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a personal statement.
Applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 25 Apr 89, as an airman
for a period of four years.
On 14 Feb 91, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was
recommending he be discharged from the Air Force (AF) for misconduct. The
specific reasons for the discharge action were:
a. On 8 Feb 90, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR)
and an Unfavorable Information File (UIF) for striking another individual
and being under the influence of alcohol.
b. On 6 Mar 90, the applicant received a Letter of Counseling
(LOC) for receiving a traffic ticket for failing to stop at a stop sign.
c. On 16 May 90, the applicant received an Article 15 for failing
to go to his prescribed duty location.
d. On 19 Jul 90, the applicant received an LOR for falsifying an
AF Form 2426, Training Request and Completion Notification.
e. On 25 Sep 90, the applicant received an LOC for writing a check
with insufficient funds to the Base Exchange.
f. On 3 Dec 90, the applicant received an LOC for failing to
receive his flu shot.
g. On 10 Jan 91, the applicant received an Article 15 for failing
to go his prescribed duty location.
On 28 Feb 91, the discharge authority directed the applicant be discharged
with a general discharge without probation and rehabilitation.
The applicant was discharged on 7 Mar 91. He served a total of 1 year,
10 months and 13 days on active duty.
On 13 Apr 92, the applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review
Board (AFDRB) to have his discharge upgraded to honorable. The AFDRB
considered all the evidence of record and concluded that his discharge was
consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the
discharge authority, that he was provided full administrative due process,
and that no legal or equitable basis existed for an upgrade of his
discharge.
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation
provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. On 29 Aug
07, the Board staff forwarded the applicant a copy of the FBI report for
review and comment within 30 days and requested he provide documentation
pertaining to his activities since leaving military service (Exhibit D).
As of this date, no response has been received by this office (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 was contrary to the provisions of the
governing regulation, unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses
committed. We considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency;
however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient 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 upon which to
recommend granting the relief sought.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been
shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially
add to our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request
for a hearing is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
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-2007-
02037 in Executive Session on 8 Nov 07 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Panel Chair
Mr. Reginald P. Howard, Member
Ms. Teri G. Spoutz, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2007-02037 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 Jun 07
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. FBI Investigative Report.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Aug 07.
Exhibit E. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Aug 07.
LAURENCE M. GRONER
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00044
The complete DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states he was never notified of being discharged because he had opted for an early out. Applicants states he visited legal personnel concerning the issue of racism; however, he was told there was nothing that could be done and it was best if he just got out of the military. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01601
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01601 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: Nov 24, 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2B be changed to a code which will allow him re-entry into the military. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-01789
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01789 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: Dec 17, 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. A resume of the applicant’s airman performance reports follows: CLOSE-OUT DATE OVERALL RATING 24 Sep...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-1988-01539-2
By letter dated, 9 Dec 76, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) notified the applicant that his discharge was upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). However, in view of the AFDRB’s earlier decision, and the contents of the FBI Report, we are unpersuaded that an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge to fully honorable, his RE code of 2, or his reason for separation is warranted. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 5 Dec 06.
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 01168
In support of his request, applicant provided a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. On 10 Sep 90, the applicant appeared before the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his general discharge be upgraded to honorable. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 8 May 09.
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01168
In support of his request, applicant provided a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. On 10 Sep 90, the applicant appeared before the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his general discharge be upgraded to honorable. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 8 May 09.
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02864
In a legal review of the discharge case file, the staff judge advocate found it legally sufficient and recommended that he be discharged from the Air Force with a general discharge and concurred with the evaluation officer that the applicant not be considered for probation and rehabilitation. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Nov 07. Exhibit E. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Nov 07, w/atch.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03278
On 14 June 1982, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending him for discharge from the Air Force under the provisions of Air Force Manual (AFM) 39-12 for drug abuse. The applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to have his UOTHC discharge upgraded to honorable. The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03866
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-03866 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On 22 Sep 86, the applicant received a Letter of Counseling (LOC) for failing to report at the prescribed time to a military doctor and his...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02367
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The Staff Judge Advocate’s statement concerning his appeal of an Article 15 he received on 17 Jan 85 made reference to another airman who was being discharged at the same time and did not pertain to him. On 26 Feb 85, the office of the Staff Judge Advocate found no errors or irregularities in the discharge case file and recommended that the applicant be furnished a general discharge. On 5 Jun 87, the...