RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03063 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

His discharge was inequitable because he was young and immature. 
This was his first time away from home and he was influenced by 
the overseas environment that allowed him to experience and 
abuse sex, and alcohol substances, that impaired his judgment. 
He believes the unhappiness and loneliness he felt from being so 
far from home and the isolation from his fellow airmen played a 
role in him making bad decisions and using poor judgment 
considering he was under the age of 21. 

 

He was under the impression that his general discharge would 
automatically be upgraded to honorable after so many years until 
he found out otherwise. 

 

The applicant did not provide any supporting documents. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 27 Oct 88 for 
a period of four years. 

 

The squadron commander initiated administrative discharge action 
against the applicant for misconduct, specifically, pattern 
discreditable involvement with military and civilian 
authorities. The underlying basis for this action was a series 
of disciplinary infractions committed by the applicant. 
Specifically, for two acts of misconduct: 1) He received an 
Article 15 for committing an indecent assault upon a female 
servicemember and for unlawfully entering the dormitory room of 
two fellow servicemembers. For these offenses, his punishment 
consisted of a reduction in grade to airman basic and 30 days of 


correctional custody; and, 2) He received an Article 15 for 
unlawfully assaulting and battering another servicemember by 
choking her with his hands. His punishment consisted of a 
reduction in grade to airman basic, forfeiture of $362.00 pay 
per month for two months, 45 days of extra duty and restriction 
to the base, and a reprimand. 

 

After consulting with counsel and having been advised of his 
rights, the applicant waived his right to submit statements in 
his own behalf. The deputy 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 13 Feb 91, in the grade of airman basic. His service was 
characterized as general (under honorable conditions), with a 
reason for separation of misconduct, pattern discreditable 
involvement with military and civilian authorities. He was 
credited with 2 years, 3 months, and 17 days of active duty 
service, including 1 year, 9 months, and 5 days of foreign 
service. 

 

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an 
investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. 

 

On 8 Oct 10, 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. Considering the 
applicant’s 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-2010-03063 in Executive Session on 19 April 2011, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Aug 10. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. FBI Report of Investigation. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 8 Oct 10, w/atchs. 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair