RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00503
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to
honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His service characterization does not reflect his entire term of
service. His characterization of service should not be affected
by a short period of misconduct.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of his
performance reports, performance feedback, and three character
references.
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 15 March 1984 and was progressively
promoted to the grade of sergeant (E-4). He served as a
Satellite Communications Systems Equipment Specialist.
The applicant received two Referral Enlisted Performance Reports,
four Letters of Reprimand (LOR), one Letter of Counseling (LOC),
one Letter of Admonishment (LOA), one Article 15, and four
Records of Individual Counseling between the periods 14 June 1991
and 12 April 1993. He was placed on the control roster and an
Unfavorable Information File (UIF) was established. As a result
of his Article 15 punishment, the applicant was reduced to the
grade of airman first class (E-3) with a date of rank of 23 March
1993.
A Certificate of Psychiatric Evaluation, dated 18 December 1992,
indicates the applicant was diagnosed with Narcissistic
Personality Features and Occupational Problems.
On 27 April 1993, the applicant was notified of his commander
intent to recommend him for a general discharge for misconduct,
minor disciplinary infractions and for diagnosed personality
disorder in accordance with Air Force Regulation 39-10, paragraph
5-11i(1) and 5-46. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the
notification and chose not to waive his rights to military
counsel or to a hearing before an administrative discharge board.
The applicant met an Administrative Discharge Review Board on
24-26 August 1993. As a result, the board recommended he be
discharged with a general discharge for minor disciplinary
infractions and for a condition which interferes with military
service, namely a personality disorder.
On 30 September 1993, the applicant was discharged from active
duty with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. He
served 9 years, 6 months, and 16 days on active duty.
Pursuant to the Boards request, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI), Clarksburg, WV, provided a copy of an
Investigation Report (Exhibit C).
On 21 March 2011, the applicant was given an opportunity to
submit comments about his post service activities and in response
to the FBI Report (Exhibit D). As of this date, this office has
received no response.
On 19 April 2011, the applicant responded with two character
references and comments indicating that he has suffered effects
from his current service characterization for many years and
hopes the Board will find in favor of granting his request.
_________________________________________________________________
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-2011-00503 in Executive Session on 29 September 2011,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2011-00503 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 Jan 11, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. FBI Report.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 21 Mar 11, w/atch.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 19 Apr 11, w/atchs.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00503
On 26 January 1990, the applicant’s commander notified him he was recommending him for an under honorable conditions (general) discharge for fraudulent entry. The applicant admitted he falsified portions of two DD Form 398s, DD Forms 1966/3 and 1966/5, Record of Military Processing–United States Armed Forces, and a DD Form 4/2, Enlistment/Reenlistment Document–Armed Forces of the United States. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-01308
On 13 January 1993, the applicant was notified of his commander's intent to recommend him for a general discharge for minor disciplinary infractions. The commander advised the applicant of his rights, and, on 19 January 1993, after consulting with counsel, he submitted a statement appealing that his discharge be characterized as honorable rather than general. We considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to compel us...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00503
On 17 Nov 09, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand. The commander recommended characterizing the discharge as General (Under Honorable Conditions). AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04348
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. On 7 March 2012, the applicant was given an opportunity to submit comments about his post service activities and in response to the FBI Report (Exhibit D). Exhibit B.
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02128
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02128 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded. 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...
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 | 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)....
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03130
The applicant was discharged, on 22 Apr 96, by reason of misconduct, with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). 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. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 30 Apr 12, w/atchs.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00039
Between February and September 1961, the applicant was counseled six times; three for failing to report for duty on time, once for failing to keep his room in inspection order, and twice for failing to report for duty. On 4 October 1961, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge in the grade of airman basic. We have considered the applicants overall record of service, the events which precipitated the discharge, and the contents...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01268
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01268 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. He requests his discharge be upgraded based on clemency. ______________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be...