RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02224
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded
to honorable.
________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His general discharge was unjustified because his service record
was honorable, including deployments and service during DESERT
STORM.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of his
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active
Duty, issued in conjunction with his 21 Aug 91 discharge.
The applicants complete submission, with attachment, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 2 Oct 89 and
was progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class
(A1C/E-3).
The squadron commander initiated administrative discharge action
against the applicant for misconduct, specifically, the
applicant received two Letters of Reprimand (LORs) for failure
to return to duty and making a false statement, had seven
dishonored check notifications; received a Letter of Counseling
(LOC) for failure to go; two memorandums for record (MFRs) for
failure to report and dereliction of duty, and two dishonored
check notifications.
After consulting with counsel and having been advised of his
rights, the applicant submitted statements in his own behalf.
The wing staff judge advocate recommended a general discharge,
without probation and rehabilitation (P&R). The discharge
authority approved the general discharge without P&R.
The applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10,
on 21 Aug 91, by reason of misconduct pattern of minor
disciplinary infractions, with service characterized as general
(under honorable conditions). He was credited with 1 year,
10 months, and 20 days of active duty service.
Pursuant to the Boards request, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an
investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C.
On 31 Jan 11, a copy of the FBI report was forwarded to the
applicant for comment. At that time, he was also invited to
provide additional evidence pertaining to his activities since
leaving the service (Exhibit D). However, 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 during 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 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 also find
insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the
discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency. We have
considered the available evidence of record; however,
considering his overall record of service, the FBI Report of
Investigation, and the lack of post service information since
his discharge, we are not persuaded that an upgrade of the
characterization of his discharge is warranted. Therefore, in
the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon
which to recommend granting the relief sought.
________________________________________________________________
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 AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2010-02224 in Executive Session on 3 March 2011, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 May 10.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. FBI Report of Investigation.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 31 Jan 11, w/atchs.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01811
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. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02037
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02037 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 30 DEC 08 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On 14 Feb 91, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending he be discharged from the Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03269
The applicant contends that during a FBI background check, he discovered they have him listed as dishonorably discharged. The applicant did receive an honorable discharge when his dishonorable discharge was suspended and his DD Form 214 properly annotates an honorable discharge. Should the applicant provide evidence to show that his Air Force records are in error, we would be willing to reconsider his request.
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00410
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 | CY2008 | BC-2008-00438
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-00438 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The applicant was discharged on 8 May 80. ______________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00359
The commander did not recommend probation and rehabilitation because the applicant was given the opportunity through correctional custody, but failed to complete the initial entry phase of the program. On 16 May 1988, the discharge authority approved the separation and directed the applicant be discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge without probation and rehabilitation. AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02224
After hearing the facts and circumstances of the investigations, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) upgraded his discharge from under other than honorable conditions 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 office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00091
DPPRS states that based on the documentation on file in the applicant’s master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. Additionally, the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing, and he provided no facts warranting a change to his RE code, character of service, or narrative reason for separation The complete DPPRS evaluation is at...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01665
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 | CY2012 | BC-2012-00129
Dereliction of duty--willful failure to report marijuana use by other Air Force members, between 1 Mar 82 and 30 Sep 82. Failure to report to duty, on or about 14 Apr 82. On 17 May 83, the applicant was furnished a General (Under Honorable Conditions) Discharge for misconduct—a pattern of misconduct prejudicial to good order and discipline and credited with 3 years, 9 months, and 21 days of service.