RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04047
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Under Other than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be
upgraded to honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was a victim of being harassed sexually, emotionally,
mentally, and physically.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal
statement; and, copies of a DD Form 293, Application for the
Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States;
his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active
Duty; a resume; and a personal background paper.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who
entered active duty on 8 June 1987 and was promoted to the grade
of sergeant (E-4) effective 22 November 1989.
On 11 March 1994, the applicant was informed that his commander
preferred charges against him for seven specifications of
indecent acts and indecent language in violation of Article 134,
Uniform Code of Military Justice; and, that his case was being
referred for hearing by a general court-martial.
On 6 April 1994, the applicant was notified that his Enlisted
Performance Report rendered for the period 17 December 1992
through 12 February 1994 was being referred based on the fact
that a Social Actions Equal Opportunity and Treatment (EOT)
investigation concluded that he sexually harassed a coworker.
On 19 May 1994, the applicant requested discharge in lieu of
trial by court-martial indicating that he understood that if his
request was approved, he may be discharged with a UOTHC
discharge.
On 1 July 1994, his commander recommended the applicants request
be approved. Following review and concurrence by the Staff Judge
Advocate, the discharge authority approved the applicants
request for discharge in lieu of court-martial submitted under
the provisions of Air Force Regulation 39-10, Chapter 4,
Paragraph 4-1b, and directed he be separated with a UOTHC
discharge without probation and rehabilitation.
On 10 June 1994, the applicant was discharged from active duty
with a UOTHC discharge. He served seven years and three days on
active duty.
Pursuant to the Boards request, the FBI indicated that on the
basis of the data furnished, they were unable to locate an arrest
record pertaining to the applicant.
On 5 January 2011, the applicant was given an opportunity to
submit comments about his post service activities (Exhibit C).
In response, the applicant provided a brief autobiography and two
character references.
A complete copy of the applicants response is at 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 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 in the discharge processing. 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 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 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-2010-04047 in Executive Session on 19 July 2011, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2010-04047 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 Oct 10, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 5 Jan 11, w/atch.
Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, not dated, w/atchs.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02943
On 12 September 1988, the applicant after consulting with legal counsel, applied for discharge in lieu of further action under the provisions of AFR 36-2 and waived his right to a hearing before of Board of Inquiry (BOI). The applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to have his UOTHC discharge upgraded to honorable and change of reason for discharge. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we find no evidence to show that the applicant’s discharge...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01216
On 19 December 2000, the discharge authority’s staff judge advocate recommended approval of the applicant’s request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial and that the applicant be discharged with a UOTHC characterization of service. It is also JA’s opinion that the applicant should not be allowed to use his discharge request to halt the court-martial process established by law as the proper means to adjudicate the criminal allegations against him and now, under the guise of an...
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 | CY2010 | BC 2010 02721
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02721 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 8 August 1991, the applicant submitted an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting a change in his discharge. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04345
________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1POE recommends denial, stating, in part, other than his own claim that he was discriminated against, saying that the commander, was finally fired for sexual harassment, he provides no information concerning his discrimination claim. In his request, the applicant also states that his commander submitted paperwork for his promotion but the member does not state when that was or provide any...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-02632
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the applicant’s UOTHC discharge for misconduct-sexual deviation 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 UOTHC discharge.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04663
In his request, the applicant indicated that he understood if his request was approved that he may be discharged with a UOTHC discharge and that he may be deprived of Veteran benefits. The applicant was discharged from active duty in the grade of technical sergeant effective 28 October 1988 with a UOTHC discharge under the authority of Air Force Regulation 39-10. ________________________________________________________________ _ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02227
He be reinstated in the Air Force Reserves. On 17 April 2003, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and approved the applicant’s request to upgrade his UOTHC discharge to an honorable discharge, to change the reason for discharge Pattern of Misconduct, Failure to Meet Financial Obligations, Commission of a Serious Offense, Sexual Deviation to Secretarial Authority, and changed his RE Code to 3K. For those reasons, they do not believe this evidence should be removed from...
He was selected for promotion to SSgt prior to receiving punishment by Article 15. The applicant further states that he filed an inspector general (IG) complaint based on two issues: that he did not receive all of the evidence used against him and the investigation done was flawed and that the IO paraphrased or “summarized” witness statements in a way that was misleading in order to make a case against him. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00013
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00013 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 19 April 1999, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request that her general discharge be upgraded to honorable (Exhibit B)....