RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02372 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

His military record was impeccable up until the last 3 months. 
His father was near death due to a construction accident that 
almost took his life. His supervisor was not reasonable with him 
and never offered alternatives that could have relieved his 
stress from worrying about his father. Unfortunately, one bad 
thing happened after another between them, and this led to him 
not being able to pass his exam to earn his wings. In the end, 
his career in the military ended prematurely. 

 

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: 

 

On 7 Oct 87, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force for 
a period of four years, as a Tactical Aircraft Maintenance 
Specialist. 

 

On 20 Nov 89, the applicant was notified by his squadron 
commander that he was recommending his discharge from the Air 
Force for unsatisfactory performance due to his failure to 
progress in on-the-job training. The reason for the proposed 
action was the applicant failed his CDC end of course (EOD) 
examination on two occasions. The applicant received numerous 
opportunities to improve his unsatisfactory performance. He 
received counseling and additional tutoring. Based on the 
applicant’s punishment under Article 15 and numerous memorandums 
for record, his commander recommended a general discharge. 

 


On 22 Nov 89, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the 
notification of discharge and, after consulting with legal 
counsel, submitted statements in his own behalf. 

 

The base legal office found the case legally sufficient to 
support the separation, and the discharge authority approved the 
separation and directed the applicant be discharged with a 
general discharge. 

 

On 28 Nov 89, the applicant was discharged and received a general 
discharge. He served on active duty for a period of 2 years, 
1 month, and 22 days. 

 

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation (FBI), Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided a copy 
of an investigation report, which is attached at Exhibit C. 

 

On 22 Dec 11, a copy of the FBI report was forwarded to the 
applicant for review and comment within 30 days. At the same 
time, the applicant was offered an opportunity to provide 
information pertaining to his activities since leaving the 
service (Exhibit D). 

 

He responded with a personal letter and two character letters. 
The applicant states the rental car incident listed on the FBI 
report was a misunderstanding between him and coworker. They had 
an agreement regarding the payment of a rental car, and the 
coworker’s credit card did not have the funds to pay the rental 
company. He finished his associate and undergraduate degrees, 
and joined a church in Durham, North Carolina. He is in his last 
semester of graduate studies at Pfeifer University, and is 
pursing a career in Healthcare Administration. 

 

The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit E. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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. The Board finds no impropriety in the characterization of 
applicant's discharge. It appears that responsible officials 
applied appropriate standards in effecting the separation, and we 
do not find persuasive evidence that pertinent regulations were 
violated or that the applicant was not afforded all the rights to 
which he was entitled at the time of discharge. The applicant 
has not shown the characterization of the discharge was contrary 


to the provisions of the governing regulation, nor has it been 
shown the nature of the discharge was unduly harsh or 
disproportionate to the offenses committed. Considered alone, we 
conclude the discharge proceedings were proper and 
characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing 
circumstances. 

 

4. Consideration of this Board, however, is not limited to the 
events which precipitated the discharge. We have a Congressional 
mandate which permits consideration of other factors; e.g., 
applicant's background, the overall quality of service, and post-
service activities and accomplishments. Further, we may base our 
decision on matters of equity and clemency rather than simply on 
whether rules and regulations which existed at the time were 
followed. This is a much broader consideration than officials 
involved in the discharge were permitted, and our decision in no 
way discredits the validity of theirs. 

 

5. Taking into consideration the available post-service 
information, it appears likely that the applicant has overcome 
the behavioral traits which led to the discharge action and has 
led a stable and productive life since the separation. We 
recognize the adverse impact of the discharge the applicant 
received; and, while it may have been appropriate at the time, we 
believe it would be an injustice for the applicant to continue to 
suffer its effects. Accordingly, we find that corrective action 
is appropriate on the basis of clemency and recommend the records 
be corrected as indicated below. 

 

6. 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 issue involved. 
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: 

 

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force 
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 28 November 
1989, he was discharged with service characterized as honorable. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2011-02372 in Executive Session on 28 Feb 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 


All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The 
following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number 
BC-2011-02372 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Nov 09, w/atch. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. FBI Report of Investigation, dated 10 Nov 11. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 22 Dec 11. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 23 Jan 12, w/atchs. 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair