Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-03038
Original file (BC-2010-03038.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03038

XXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE

HEARING DESIRED: NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His discharge be upgraded to honorable.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

It has been 30 years since he was discharged. He was young when he enlisted and had never been away from home. He has learned from his mistakes. The stigma of a general discharge makes it more difficult for him to obtain employment in his chosen field.

In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant’s military personnel records indicate he enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 13 Mar 79 and was progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class (E-3), effective and with a date of rank of 6 Oct 79.

The relevant facts pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are contained in the Discharge Notification Letter at Exhibit B. Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.

On 21 Apr 80, the applicant was furnished a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge for Misconduct – Frequent Involvement with Civil/Military Authorities and he was credited with one year, one month, and nine days of total active service.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provided copies of two Investigative Reports, which are at Exhibit C.

Copies of the FBI Investigative Reports and a request for post-service information were forwarded to applicant on 27 Oct 10 for review and comment 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 this case; however, we find no evidence or an error or injustice that occurred in the discharge process. It appears the applicant’s discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation in effect at the time, and within the commander’s discretionary authority. No evidence has been presented to indicate otherwise. We considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, in light of the applicant’s extensive arrest record, as reflected in the FBI Investigative Reports, and the absence of any information related to his post-service activities, there is no basis for us to recommend granting relief upon this basis. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend favorable consideration of the application.

________________________________________________________________

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-2010-03038 in Executive Session on 2 Jun 11, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

Ms. XXXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair

Ms. XXXXXXXXXXX, Member

Mr. XXXXXXXXXXX, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-03038 was considered:

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Sep 10, w/atch.

Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.

Exhibit C.  FBI Report.

Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 27 Oct 10, w/atch.

XXXXXXXXXXX

Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-1993-02122A

    Original file (BC-1993-02122A.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 29 Sep 92, in a personal appearance, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied the applicant’s request for an honorable discharge and a changed reason for separation. He did not realize until years after his discharge that he was an alcoholic, making it impossible for him to drink in “moderation” as the Air Force had advised. Complete copies of his submissions, with attachments, are provided at Exhibit F. On 19 May 05, the AFBCMR Staff invited the applicant to submit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2009-03038

    Original file (BC-2009-03038.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    In support of her request, the applicant provides a copy of her original MSD extension request and correspondence related to the matter under review. On 15 Dec 08, NGB/A1POE recommended approval; however, the ANG Chief of Chaplains (NGB/HC) subsequently recommended denial, indicating the applicant’s retention was not in the best interests of the Air Force. However, inasmuch as the Board lacks the authority to reinstate applicants into the ANG, we believe the proper and fitting relief in...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01556

    Original file (BC-2005-01556.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01556 INDEX NUMBER: 110.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: No MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 9 Nov 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Under Honorable Conditions (general) discharge from the Air Force be upgraded to honorable. Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC 2010 02751

    Original file (BC 2010 02751.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02751 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) be upgraded to honorable. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provided a copy of an Investigative Report, which is at Exhibit C. On 14 Sep 10, a copy of the FBI report...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01814

    Original file (BC-2010-01814.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 13 Nov 79, the applicant submitted a request for discharge. The applicant was discharged on 15 Nov 79 with a UOTHC discharge, with the narrative reason for separation of “request for discharge for the good of the service.” Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) provided an investigative report which is at Exhibit C. A copy of the report and a request for post- service information was forwarded to the applicant on 10 Sep 10 (Exhibit D). His addictions...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02864

    Original file (BC-2007-02864.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In a legal review of the discharge case file, the staff judge advocate found it legally sufficient and recommended that he be discharged from the Air Force with a general discharge and concurred with the evaluation officer that the applicant not be considered for probation and rehabilitation. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Nov 07. Exhibit E. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Nov 07, w/atch.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-04506

    Original file (BC-2010-04506.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS However, while convening authority subsequently approved the findings of guilty with regard to the violations of Article 134, the finding of guilty for the charge and second specification of the Article 113 violation was not approved and approved only so much of the sentence as provided for the BCD, six months of confinement, forfeiture of $249.00 pay per month for six months and a reduction to the grade of airman basic. There is no...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04751

    Original file (BC-2010-04751.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04751 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists to upgrade the applicant’s General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00330

    Original file (BC-2012-00330.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00330 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His character of service be changed from general, under honorable conditions (UHC) to honorable. On 7 Aug 84, the applicant applied to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (DRB) to have his UOTHC discharge upgraded to honorable. In our view, the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02383

    Original file (BC-2007-02383.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding both the AFDRB and AFBCMR decisions, and the rationale of the earlier decisions, see the Record of Proceedings (ROP) at Exhibit E. Subsequent to the AFBCMR decision, the applicant’s sister, having been appointed conservator of his estate, has submitted an application on behalf of her brother, requesting reconsideration. __________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered...