Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02955
Original file (BC-2010-02955.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02955 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to 
honorable. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

She was young, immature and lacked the maturity to follow the 
rules and requirements while in technical school. She is now 
mature, responsible and wishes to serve her country before she is 
disqualified due to age. She would like the opportunity to right 
the wrong. Her pattern of misconduct while inexcusable, was 
minor in nature and she wishes to make amends. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 8 September 1987, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air 
Force. 

 

On 6 May 1988, the applicant was notified by her commander that 
he was recommending she be discharged from the Air Force under 
the provisions of AFR 39-10, Administration Separation of Airmen, 
for a pattern of misconduct. The specific reasons for this action 
were she received three Article 15 actions for wrongfully 
permitting a member of the opposite sex to be in her dormitory 
room, failing to report for duty for an entire day, and operating 
a vehicle without proper registration, not having a valid 
driver’s license and no proof of insurance. 

 

The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of 
discharge, received advice from a military defense attorney, and 
waived her right to submit statements in her own behalf. On 
6 May 1988, the discharge authority determined that a general 
discharge was appropriate in light of the applicant’s overall 
military record. 

 

On 13 May 1988, the applicant was discharged with a general 
discharge after completing a period of 8 month and 6 days total 
active service. 


Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation (FBI), Clarksburg, WV, provided a copy of an 
Investigation Report (Exhibit C). 

 

On 9 December 2010, the FBI investigation and a request for post-
service information were forwarded to the applicant for response 
within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received 
by this office (Exhibit D). 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 an error or injustice. We took 
notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the 
merits of the case; however, 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 conclude, therefore, that the 
discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the 
discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances. We 
considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we 
do not find the evidence presented is sufficient 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. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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-2010-02955 in Executive Session on 1 June 2011, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 Panel Chair 

Member 

 Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 22 Jul 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. FBI Response, dated 20 Sep 10. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 

 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC 2010 02752

    Original file (BC 2010 02752.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02752 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable and his narrative reason for separation (Misconduct – Pattern of Minor Disciplinary Infractions) be changed. She served 2 years, 5 months and 7 days on active duty. On 23...

  • 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 | CY2006 | BC-2006-02153

    Original file (BC-2006-02153.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02153 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 21 JANUARY 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 27 March 1989, the discharge authority directed that she be discharged with a general under honorable...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01255

    Original file (BC-2011-01255.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 28 June 1988, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge in the grade of airman basic. ________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02160

    Original file (BC-2012-02160.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02160 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded to Honorable. While the applicant contends her two years of service merit an honorable discharge, we find no evidence or an error or injustice that occurred in the discharge process. It...

  • 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 | CY2003 | BC-2002-02955

    Original file (BC-2002-02955.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-02955 INDEX NUMBER: 128.10 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reenlistment on 14 Jan 02 be changed to 17 Jan 02. The window to get the SRB recomputed was if the member reenlisted between 2 Jan 02 and 16 Jan 02 and had a DOS of 17 Jan 02 or later. We took...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00460

    Original file (BC-2007-00460.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00460 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 19 AUGUST 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code and her under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded. On 5 September 1990, the applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00809

    Original file (BC-2010-00809.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    At the time of her enlistment, her intent was to have an Air Force career. 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. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02905

    Original file (BC-2010-02905.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02905 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Narrative Reason for Separation on her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be changed from Conditions That Interfere With Military Service-Not Disability-Character and Behavior Disorder to DSM IV...