RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04181
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to
honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
During the contested time period, she was young, in an abusive
relationship, made mistakes and did not perform as an airman.
She desires her discharge be upgraded in order to receive
education benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill. She would like
to further her education and career.
In support of her request, the applicant submits a copy of
DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge from the
Armed Forces of the United States, copy of her 2010 appraisal,
and copies of SF 50, Notification of Personnel Action.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 14 May 1993.
The applicant was notified by her commander of his intent to
recommend her discharge from the Air Force under the provisions
of AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208. The specific reasons follow:
a. The applicant was delinquent on her American Express
Government Card for over 90 days.
b. On 26 March 1995, the applicant displayed conduct
unbecoming of an airman in the United States Air Force for simple
assault.
c. On 14 April 1995, the applicant displayed conduct
unbecoming of an airman in the United States Air Force for a
second time within a month for simple assault. Furthermore, she
violated the curfew for individuals residing in the dormitory.
d. On 1 June 1995, the applicant wrote two checks which were
returned due to insufficient funds in her checking account.
e. On 26 June 1995, the applicant failed her end of course
examination for the first time with a score of 59.
f. On 26 September 1995, she failed her end of course
examination for the second time with a score of 64
She was advised of her rights in this matter and elected to
submit a statement in her own behalf. In a legal review of the
case file, the acting staff judge advocate found the case legally
sufficient and recommended discharge. The discharge authority
concurred with the recommendation and directed a general (under
honorable conditions) discharge. The applicant was discharged on
22 December 1995. She served 2 years, 7 months and 9 days on
active duty.
_________________________________________________________________
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. In the interest of
justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency;
however, there was no evidence submitted 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.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of an 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-2011-04181 in Executive Session on 30 May 2012, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2011-04181 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 October 2011, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicants Master Personnel Records.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02099
She was discharged from the Air Force because she failed training and the Air Force would not reclassify her. Her commander initiated separation action on 11 Mar 2010, which gave her 178 days active duty at the time her separation action was initiated. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC- 2012-02099 in Executive Session on 20 Dec 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00914
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-00914 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her character of service be corrected to reflect Honorable, instead of Not Applicable. Should the Board determine the applicant receive an Honorable service characterization, they recommend the separation code and narrative reason for separation be...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 00914
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-00914 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her character of service be corrected to reflect Honorable, instead of Not Applicable. Should the Board determine the applicant receive an Honorable service characterization, they recommend the separation code and narrative reason for separation be...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05798
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC 2011 01180
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01180 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel record, the applicant was discharged for not making satisfactory progress in a required training program. We took notice of the applicants complete submission in judging the merits...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-02291
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-02291 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reentry (RE) code of “2C” which denotes "Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service" be changed. DPSOS states based on the documentation on file in the master personnel...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02198
It appears that she is requesting administrative corrections be made to her medical records and discharge documents. She submitted a hardship letter requesting that she be assigned to a different location or separated so that she could later reenlist. The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 14 Feb 03 for review...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04664
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04664 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The narrative reason for separation on her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be changed to reflect Convenience of the Government, rather than Unsatisfactory Performance, so she may be eligible for Montgomery GI...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00351
The four test failures were evidence of her lack of motivation. The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: While it is true she was counseled multiple times for her failures, she would like to make it clear that her academic deficiencies are not because of her lack of motivation. She failed this course, but it does not mean she would fail out of every course of study in the...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04730
________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-04730 in Executive Session on 15 May 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 Nov 11, w/atch. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 4 Jan 12. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Jan 12.