RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01042
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to
honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was young and immature. His wife left him and he turned to
alcohol and made some very bad choices. Since his discharge, he
has turned his life around and is now a Fire Fighter.
In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his
DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge from the
Armed Forces of the United States.
Applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 20 Jul 87, the applicant contracted his enlistment in the
Regular Air Force. He was promoted to airman first class
effective with a date of rank of 1 Sep 87. He was demoted to
airman basic on 2 Sep 88. He served as a security specialist.
On 22 Sep 88, the applicants commander notified him that he was
recommending his discharge from the Air Force for misconduct.
The specific reasons for the discharge action were:
a. On 14 Apr 88, he received a Letter of Counseling (LOC)
for failing to complete his Career Development Course (CDC) and a
mobility form.
b. On 21 Jul 88, he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR)
and a Unfavorable Information File (UIF) entry for failing a
scheduled dormitory inspection.
c. On 23 Aug 88, he received an LOR and UIF entry for
driving with an expired drivers license.
d. On 2 Sep 88, he received an Article 15 for uttering a
check and stealing a box of checks.
His commander advised him of his rights in this matter.
On 26 Sep 88, he acknowledged receipt of the notification letter
and, after consulting with legal counsel waived his right to
submit a statement in his own behalf.
On 28 Sep 88, a legal review was conducted and the staff judge
advocate found the case legally sufficient to support separation
and recommended a general discharge without probation and
rehabilitation.
On 5 Oct 88, the discharge authority directed a general
discharge.
The applicant was discharged on 11 Oct 88. He served 1 year,
2 months and 22 days of active service.
On 30 Sep 10, the Board staff requested the applicant provide
documentation concerning his activities since leaving military
service (Exhibit D). As of this date no response has been
received by this office.
_________________________________________________________________
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 in this
application.
______________________________________________________________
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-2010-01042 in Executive Session on 4 Nov 10, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Mar 10, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 30 Sep 10, w/atch.
Panel Chair
On or about 22 Nov 85, he failed to progress satisfactorily in the Air Force WMP by gaining 10 pounds instead of losing the 5 pounds required. On 30 Jan 89, the commander, Air Refueling Wing, , received the proposed demotion case against the applicant and agreed with the applicant’s commander that demotion action was appropriate, effective 30 Jan 89. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed this application...
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00319
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD AFSN/SSAN PERSONAL APPEARANCE x RECORD REVIEW NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL MEMBER SITTING HON GEN UOTHC | OTHER | DENY na x my | eC x Fe x XxX INDEX NUMBER A67.90 A94.05 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE LETTER OF NOTIFICATION iQ Th [a BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD HEARING DATE 24 Sep 2003 CASE...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-01497
On 2 Oct 89, the applicant’s commander notified him he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for misconduct. He was discharged on 11 Oct 89. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof of the existence of either...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00854
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS c. Three Letter of Debt Complaints/Dishonored Check DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00854 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded to Honorable. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the applicant’s General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge for...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01050
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01050 INDEX NUMBER: 110.02 COUNSEL: J.C. HERNANDEZ HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her narrative reason for separation be changed. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. Applicant's Master Personnel Records Exhibit C. Letter,...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01451
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01451 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable. He has spent many years reflecting upon this. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to recommend granting relief on that basis.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03270
Statements in the applicant’s record reflect he failed to report on time for duty on 24 Mar 88 and did not clear his absence with anyone. On 22 Jul 88, the discharge authority directed the applicant’s general discharge. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 24 February 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36- 2603: Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Panel Chair Mr. John B. Hennessey, Member Ms....
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-205-02185
On 9 Sep 86, the commander notified the applicant that the results of the positive urinalysis would not be used to characterize his service. On 29 Oct 86, the applicant was advised that at anytime before action on the recommendation for discharge was complete, he could apply for retirement. To date, a response has not been received.
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0331
EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING APPLICANT'S ISSUE.AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE. CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD02-0331 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. The record indicates the applicant received an Article 15 for wrongfully consuming alcoholic beverages while under...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-01606
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...