Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC 2010 02637
Original file (BC 2010 02637.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02637 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

___________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

Her under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be 
upgraded to honorable. 

 

___________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

She honorably served her country for 8 years; however, in the last 
7 months of service she was forced to have an abortion. She 
thought time would heal her embarrassment and shame of what 
happened to her while serving in the Air Force, but it has not. 
Her chain of command was prejudiced. She attempted to get 
assistance from her unit, but was forced to go through Senator Pete 
Domenici of New Mexico only to be given an UOTHC discharge as 
retaliation. She received two Article 15s for not carrying 200 
pound boxes on her back or for not mixing dangerous chemicals in a 
room with no ventilation. She did not know how to handle some 
difficult issues and after returning from her deployment she tested 
positive for tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). She would like her record 
to reflect 8 years of honorable and dedicated service. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of her DD 
Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. 

 

Her complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. 

 

___________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant enlisted in the Air Force on 27 Nov 91 and was 
progressiviely promoted to the grade of senior airman. 

 

The applicant was notified by her commander that he was 
recommending her discharge from the Air Force under the provisions 
of AFR 39-10, paragraph 5-51, for drug abuse. The specific reason 
was for using marijuana. She acknowledged receipt of the discharge 
notification. After a legal review, the staff judge advocate found 
the case legally sufficient. The applicant received an UOTHC 
discharge from the Air Force on 24 Jun 92. She was credited with 6 
months and 22 days of prior active duty service. 

 


Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, was unable to identify an 
arrest record on the basis of information furnished. 

 

___________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 probable error or injustice. After 
careful consideration of the available evidence, we found no 
indication the actions taken to effect her discharge were 
improper or contrary to the provisions of the governing 
regulations in effect at the time, or the actions taken against 
the applicant were based on factors other than her own 
misconduct. Having found no error or injustice with regard to 
the actions that occurred while the applicant was a military 
member, we conclude that no basis exists to grant favorable 
action on her request. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

 

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material 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 for Docket Number 
BC-2010-02637 in Executive Session on 21 Sep 10, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

 

 

 


The following documentary evidence for Docket Number BC-2010-
02637 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Jul 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 
 

 Panel Chair 

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03313

    Original file (BC-2006-03313.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03313 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 26 APRIL 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. Additionally, the applicant provided no facts warranting a change to her under other than honorable...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01499

    Original file (BC-2010-01499.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 7 March 1977, after consulting with counsel, the applicant filed her request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Air Force Manual 39-12, Chapter 2, Section F. She indicated that if her request for discharge was approved, she understood it may result in her receiving a UOTHC discharge. On 23 March 1978 and 8 December 1980, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request to upgrade her discharge. Furthermore,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04590

    Original file (BC-2012-04590.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04590 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reentry (RE) code of 2C (entry-level separation with uncharacterized service or involuntary honorable discharge) be changed so that she can be eligible to rejoin the military. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00498

    Original file (BC-2013-00498.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The base legal office reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support separation and recommended the applicant’s request for discharge be approved and that she receive an UOTHC discharge without probation and rehabilitation. On 25 Apr 83, the discharge authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and on 6 May 83, she was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen, Chapter 4, Request for Discharge in Lieu of Trial...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01899

    Original file (BC-2010-01899.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    She does not argue the fact that she had an issue with drinking while serving in the Air Force; however, at that time she could have used someone to guide her who could have aided her in completing her military obligation, but the Air Force was quick to discharge her. Having found no error or injustice with regard to the actions that occurred while the applicant was a military member, we conclude that no basis exists to grant favorable action on her request. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04732

    Original file (BC-2010-04732.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04732 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On 31 Jan 11, the Board staff requested the applicant provide documentation concerning her activities since leaving military service (Exhibit C). ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00631

    Original file (BC-2011-00631.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00631 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be corrected to reflect her characterization of discharge as general (under honorable conditions) rather than under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC). On 12 December 2002,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01588

    Original file (BC-2006-01588.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. On 12 June 1985, applicant submitted an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting her UOTHC discharge to be upgraded to a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The AFDRB considered all the evidence of record and concluded the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and the applicant was...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02099

    Original file (BC-2012-02099.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    She was discharged from the Air Force because she failed training and the Air Force would not reclassify her. Her commander initiated separation action on 11 Mar 2010, which gave her 178 days active duty at the time her separation action was initiated. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC- 2012-02099 in Executive Session on 20 Dec 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-02933

    Original file (BC-2010-02933.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E). The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material 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.