RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00734
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be changed
to honorable.
2. His narrative reason for separation (Misconduct) be removed.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He performed in an outstanding manner while in the Air Force, and
his discharge is inequitable, based on the offense committed. He
believes that other factors contributed to his discharge.
In support of the appeal, the applicant provides copies of
extracts from his military personnel records.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicants records reflect that he enlisted in the Regular
Air Force on 30 Mar 89 for a period of four years. On 15 Apr 94,
he was notified of his commander's intent to recommend him for a
general (under honorable conditions) discharge for Misconduct
Commission of a Serious Offense Other Serious Offenses. The
specific reason for the proposed discharge was that he received
an Article 15, for his intent to deceive a commissioned officer,
by making an official statement that he needed to take leave to
babysit his daughter, who had been exposed to chicken pox, and
was known by the applicant to be false.
The applicant was advised of his rights in this matter and after
consulting with counsel submitted a statement in his own behalf.
The discharge case was reviewed by the base legal office and they
recommended the applicant be discharged for Misconduct
Commission of a Serious Offense Other Serious Offenses, with a
general (under honorable conditions) discharge without probation
and rehabilitation (P&R). The discharge authority approved the
separation and directed the applicant be discharged with a
general (under honorable conditions) discharge.
He was separated from the Air Force on 9 May 94, under the
provisions of AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen, for
misconduct and received a general (under honorable conditions)
discharge and a narrative reason for separation of Misconduct.
He served a total of five years, one month, and ten days of
active service.
Pursuant to the Boards request, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, Clarksburg, WV, indicated on 22 Apr 10, that, on
the basis of data furnished, they are 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, we find no evidence of an error or injustice
that occurred in the discharge process. 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 that 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, because of the lack of documentation
concerning his activities since leaving the service, we are not
inclined to recommend upgrading his discharge based on clemency
at this time. In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of
sufficient evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to
recommend granting the relief sought in this application.
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES:
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-2010-00734 in Executive Session on 23 Sep 10, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Feb 10, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Available Master Personnel Records.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2005-01773
On 19 Sep 96, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his UOTHC discharge to honorable. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. The following...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00016
The specific reason for the proposed action was: Between 21 Apr 93 and 7 Sep 94, the applicant had one instance of disorderly conduct; one instance of voluntarily riding in a vehicle being driven by an individual who was under the influence of alcohol; one instance of AFR 35-10, Dress and Personal Appearance of Air Force Personnel violation, and one instance of failing to report to the Senior Enlisted Advisor when asked to. On 5 Oct 94, the Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) reviewed the case and...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03392
The reasons for these actions are as follows: On 14 Feb 96, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for failure to obey a lawful general regulation to comply with the dress and personal appearance standards. On 3 Jan 96, the applicant received a LOR for making a false official statement that he had a medical appointment when he did not. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02111
On 12 May 94, the applicant was notified of his commanders intention to recommend his discharge from the Air Force for commission of a serious offensesexual perversion. On 28 Jul 94, the applicant was so discharged and was credited with six years, five months, and three days of total active service. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02216
On 15 Mar 12, the applicant was discharged for Misconduct (Serious Offense), and was credited with 9 years, 10 months, and 2 days of total active service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the offices of the Air Force office of responsibility which are at Exhibit C and D. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01753
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01753 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient for us to conclude that the applicants post-service activities overcome the misconduct for...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00734
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC 2003-00734 INDEX CODE: 111.05 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Airman Performance Report (APR) rendered for the period 2 June 1977 through 1 June 1978 be declared void and he be provided supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of technical sergeant. Applicant’s performance...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC 2007 04132
Records indicate he appeared, with counsel, before the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) on 25 Feb 97. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and the BCMR Medical Consultant and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00952
He also waived a lengthy service probation consideration by the Office of the Secretary of the Air Force. He acknowledged his understanding that if the separation authority approves the recommendation for discharge, he will receive an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge. On 16 Jul 91, the Staff Judge Advocate reviewed the discharge package and found it legally and factually supporting the discharge action and the discharge authority approved the commanders recommendation the...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01587
4) He received seven (7) Records of Individual Counseling, three for failure to go, three for failure to conform to AFR 35-10, Dress and Personal Appearance of Air Force Personnel standards, and one for failure to attend required training. On 11 Apr 94, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen, by reason of misconduct, and received a general discharge. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...