RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03617
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded
to honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He desires an upgrade in order to obtain Department of Veterans
Affairs (DVA) educational benefits.
In support of his request, the applicant provides correspondence
from the DVA and a class schedule.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 18 Sep 92, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force.
On, 29 Sep 92, the applicant signed a DD Form 2366, Montgomery
GI Bill Act of 1984 (MGIB), indicating that he understood he
must receive an honorable discharge to receive future
educational entitlements.
On 7 Jun 93, the applicant was notified of pending discharge
action. Specifically, the commander cited minor disciplinary
infractions as the basis for discharge.
The applicants misconduct included two Letters of Reprimand
with Unfavorable Information Files for failure to go and failure
to complete assigned duties; two Records of Individual
Counseling, a DD Form 1408, Armed Forces Traffic Ticket, for
driving without proof of registration and insurance, and three
memorandums for record for a failed dormitory room spot check,
late duty reporting, and failing to do an assigned task.
On 10 Jun 93, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the
notification for discharge, consulted counsel, and waived his
right to submit statements in his own behalf.
On 15 Jun 93, the staff judge advocate found the case legally
sufficient and recommended discharge. On 16 Jun 10, the
discharge authority concurred and directed discharge. On
18 Jun 93, the applicant was discharged with a general (under
honorable conditions) discharge. He was credited with nine
months and one day of active service.
On 15 Dec 08, the Air Force Discharge Review Board denied the
applicants request for an upgrade of his discharge, citing the
applicant was provided full administrative due process and his
discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive
requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the
discretion of the discharge authority.
Pursuant to the Boards request, the Federal Bureau of
Investigations (FBI) states they were unable to identify an
arrest record on the basis of the information furnished.
On 7 Dec 10, a request for post-service information was
forwarded to the applicant for a response within 30 days
(Exhibit C). As of this date, this office has not received 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 error or injustice. After a
thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicants
complete submission, it is our opinion that corrective action is
not warranted. It appears the discharge was consistent with the
substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within
the commanders discretionary authority. The applicant has
provided no evidence that the characterization of his 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 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 Docket Number
BC-2010-03617 in Executive Session on 15 February 2011, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 Sep 10, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 7 Dec 10, w/atch.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02662
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02662 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 28 Jan 93, the applicant was notified by his squadron commander that he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for misconduct-minor disciplinary infractions. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00039
Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the applicant’s general discharge for minor disciplinary infractions was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the commander’s discretionary authority. 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 general discharge. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01786
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-01786 INDEX CODES: 108.00, 131.09 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect that he was medically retired in the grade of technical sergeant, the highest grade he held in the Air Force, with a disability rating of 75 percent. Under the Air Force system (Title...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02409
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02409 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03284
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03284 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His honorable discharge be changed to an honorable hardship discharge. On 22 Apr 92, the applicants commander concurred with the supervisors recommendation and non-selected the applicant for reenlistment. He discussed his family concerns and...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02403
Records reveal that on 7 Sep 93, the applicant was notified of pending discharge action. The applicant was discharged on 19 May 93. On 8 Sep 10, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for a response within 30 days (Exhibit C).
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2005-01773
On 19 Sep 96, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his UOTHC discharge 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 offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. The following...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-02978
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-02978 INDEX CODE: 112.10 xxxxxxxxxxxxx COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable and his reentry (RE) code be changed so he may enlist in the Air Force Reserve. On 28 Apr 93, he received nonjudicial punishment for being...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04319
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04319 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded to Honorable and his RE Code of 2B (Discharge Under General or Other Than Honorable Conditions) be changed accordingly. On 5 Mar 93, the applicant was furnished a General (Under Honorable...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01516
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01516 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be entitled to benefits under the Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC) program for his medical conditions associated with application to the Board, AFBCMR Docket No. ...