Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-02600
Original file (BC-2009-02600.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2009-02600
            INDEX CODE:  110.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

It is unclear what the applicant is requesting; however, it  appears  he  is
requesting his general (under honorable conditions)  discharge  be  upgraded
to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His DD Form 214, Certificate of  Release  or  Separation  from  Active  Duty
Military Service, was corrected to include his missing decorations.

He served his first tour with all his heart and reenlisted.  He  would  like
his Airman Performance Reports (APRs) and decorations  to  be  reviewed  and
considered as support of his request.

In support of this application, the applicant submits copies of his APRs.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air  Force  in  the  grade  of  airman
basic on 4 Mar 83 for a period of 4 years.  He  was  progressively  promoted
to the grade of sergeant with an effective date and date of rank  of  1  Mar
87.

He received overall ratings of nine (9) on all APRs he received  during  his
time in service.

On 12 May 88, his commander  notified  him  that  he  was  recommending  his
separation from the Air Force under the provisions of  AFR  39-10,  para  5-
49d, for the commission of a serious offense.  His specific reason was  that
on or about 30 Apr 88, while stationed in Germany, the applicant operated  a
passenger car while  drunk.   The  applicant  was  advised  of  his  rights,
acknowledged receipt of the notification and submitted a  statement  on  his
own behalf.  A review of the case by the Staff  Judge  Advocate  office  was
found legally sufficient.  On 13 Jun 88, the  discharge  authority  approved
the applicant’s  general  (under  honorable  conditions)  discharge  without
probation and rehabilitation.  He was discharged on 21 Jun 88; he  served  5
years, 9 months and 11 days on active duty.

On 2 Oct 92, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied  a  similar
request by the applicant.  The AFDRB concluded the discharge was  consistent
with  the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements   of   the   discharge
regulation, was within the discretion of the discharge  authority  and  that
the applicant was provided full administrative due  process.   In  addition,
the AFDRB found no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of  the  applicant’s
discharge.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of  Investigation  (FBI)
provided a copy of an Investigative Report, which is at Exhibit  C.   On  29
Sep 09, a copy of the FBI report and request  for  post-service  information
was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days, as  of
this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).


_________________________________________________________________

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 addition, in view of the contents of the  FBI  Identification
Record we are not persuaded that the  characterization  of  the  applicant’s
discharge warrants an upgrade on the basis of clemency.  Therefore,  in  the
absence of evidence to  the  contrary,  we  find  no  basis  upon  which  to
recommend granting the relief it appears the applicant is seeking.

_________________________________________________________________

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  BC-2009-02600  in
Executive Session on 17 Nov 2009, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mrs. Barbara A. Westgate, Panel Chair
      Mr. Dick Anderegg, Member
      Mr. Noble K. Eden, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 Jul 09, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  FBI Report.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR dated 29 Sep 09.




                                   BARBARA A. WESTGATE
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 01168

    Original file (BC 2009 01168.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (BC-2009-01168.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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-2009-00410

    Original file (BC-2009-00410.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He received a reduction in grade from E-4 to E-2 and served three months confinement for his poor decisions. However, his commander made the decision to administratively discharge him, after serving a humiliating confinement, time away from family, and parading him around the base for all to see him just doing work details and going to the chow hall. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01665

    Original file (BC-2009-01665.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    To date, no response to this request has been received. 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. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 10 Jul 09.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-02632

    Original file (BC-2009-02632.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the applicant’s UOTHC discharge for misconduct-sexual deviation was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the commander’s discretionary authority. In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists to upgrade the applicant’s UOTHC discharge.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01505

    Original file (BC-2009-01505.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 23 Sep 94, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge. On 29 Jun 09, the applicant provided a personal statement, a character reference letter, and excerpts from his military personnel records (Exhibit E). ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 01028

    Original file (BC 2009 01028.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-01028 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. Applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to have his general discharge upgraded to honorable. Based on the available evidence of record,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-02173

    Original file (BC-2008-02173.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors that occurred in the discharge processing, and provided no facts warranting an upgrade to his discharge characterization. The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2008-02173 in Executive Session on 27 January 2009, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-01606

    Original file (BC-1998-01606.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 5 Apr 89, the applicant was notified by the commander that he was recommending the applicant be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10, paragraph 5-50.1, for drug abuse with service characterized as general. On 6 Jul 90, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge to honorable. Therefore, the Board recommends his discharge be upgraded to honorable and a majority of the Board recommends his RE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9801606

    Original file (9801606.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 5 Apr 89, the applicant was notified by the commander that he was recommending the applicant be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10, paragraph 5-50.1, for drug abuse with service characterized as general. On 6 Jul 90, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge to honorable. Therefore, the Board recommends his discharge be upgraded to honorable and a majority of the Board recommends his RE...