Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00734
Original file (BC-2010-00734.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
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 applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant’s 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 Board’s 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 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2005-01773

    Original file (BC-2005-01773.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (BC-2012-00016.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (BC 2014 03392.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (BC 2013 02111.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 12 May 94, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intention to recommend his discharge from the Air Force for commission of a serious offense—sexual 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

    Original file (BC-2012-02216.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (BC 2014 01753.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 applicant’s post-service activities overcome the misconduct for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00734

    Original file (BC-2003-00734.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (BC 2007 04132.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (BC 2014 00952.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 commander’s recommendation the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01587

    Original file (BC-2011-01587.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...