Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03367
Original file (BC-2010-03367.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03367 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

The applicant makes no contentions. 

 

The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 2 Aug 83, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force. 

 

On 15 Apr 85, the applicant was notified of pending discharge 
action. Specifically, the commander cited Misconduct, Conduct 
Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline as the basis for 
discharge. 

 

The records reveal the applicant’s misconduct consisted of two 
Article 15s, Record of Nonjudicial Punishment Proceedings, for 
being drunk and disorderly on station and sleeping on post. He 
received two Letters of Counseling for being late for duty and 
for being in an extremely relaxed position on duty (possibly 
asleep), and a Letter of Reprimand for reporting late to duty. 
Additionally, on 21 Feb 85, an Incident/Complaint Report was 
filed against the applicant for being intoxicated, belligerent, 
and obnoxious. 

 

The applicant consulted counsel and waived his right to submit 
statements in his own behalf. 

 

On 23 Apr 85, the staff judge advocate found the case legally 
sufficient and recommended discharge without probation and 
rehabilitation. 

 

On 26 Apr 85, the discharge authority directed discharge. On 
1 May 85, the applicant was separated with a general (under 
honorable conditions) discharge. 

 


Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of 
Investigations (FBI) provided an investigative report, which is 
at Exhibit C. On 18 Feb 11, a copy of the investigative report, 
with a request for post-service information was forwarded to the 
applicant for a response within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this 
date, the applicant has not provided a response. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 an injustice. After 
careful consideration of the available evidence, we found no 
indication that the actions taken to effect the applicant’s 
discharge were improper or contrary to the provisions of the 
governing regulations in effect at the time. Further, in view 
of the contents of the FBI Identification Record we are not 
persuaded that the characterization of the applicant’s discharge 
warrants an upgrade to honorable on the basis of clemency. 
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 his 
request. 

 

4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not 
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel 
will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. 
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably 
considered. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 Docket Number 
BC-2010-03367 in Executive Session on 30 March 2011, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 Jul 10. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. FBI Report. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 18 Feb 11, w/atchs. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 

 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02367

    Original file (BC-2003-02367.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The Staff Judge Advocate’s statement concerning his appeal of an Article 15 he received on 17 Jan 85 made reference to another airman who was being discharged at the same time and did not pertain to him. On 26 Feb 85, the office of the Staff Judge Advocate found no errors or irregularities in the discharge case file and recommended that the applicant be furnished a general discharge. On 5 Jun 87, the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03367

    Original file (BC-2005-03367.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 10 March 1981, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the age of 18 in the grade of airman basic for a period of 6 years. For this offense, she received a Letter of Counseling (LOC). We conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01640

    Original file (BC-2010-01640.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    We considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient for us to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists to upgrade the applicant’s UOTHC discharge. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-01640 in Executive Session on 7 Dec 10,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00651

    Original file (BC-2005-00651.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, the applicant’s base driving privileges were suspended. In addition, based on his overall record of service, the contents of the FBI Report of Investigation, and the absence of evidence related to his post-service activities and accomplishments, we are not persuaded that an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge is warranted on the basis of clemency. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Mar 05.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02863

    Original file (BC-2010-02863.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02863 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His disability be reevaluated and his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (DRB) to have his UOTHC discharge upgraded to honorable. A...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00926

    Original file (BC-2010-00926.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00926 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. Further, although the applicant states he has been a productive member of society and has provided a letter of explanation...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00605

    Original file (BC-2010-00605.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Available records reflect the applicant was discharged on 10 Feb 87 as a result of Alcohol Abuse Rehabilitation Failure. Other derogatory information contained in the records reflect he received an Article 15, Record of Nonjudicial Punishment, for assaulting a female and he had four days of lost time due to a civil confinement for three assault charges. Exhibit C. FBI Report.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-04303

    Original file (BC-2008-04303.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-04303 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 21 Mar 85, the squadron commander notified the applicant of administrative discharge board (ADB) action for minor disciplinary infractions,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02979

    Original file (BC-2010-02979.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was discharged on 1 May 85. 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. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 30 Sep 10, w/atch.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00225

    Original file (BC-2009-00225.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He had no idea about the effects of drug addiction, neither did the Air Force at that time. On 6 Mar 86, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10, by reason of misconduct – drug abuse, with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). ___________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that...