Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04348
Original file (BC-2011-04348.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04348 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He feels he should have received counseling and rehabilitation 
for his infractions as is standard practice in the Air Force now. 
With a change in characterization, he would qualify for these 
services through the Department of Veteran Affairs (DVA). 

 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal 
statement; and, copies of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release 
or Discharge from Active Duty; and his commander’s letter 
directing he be administratively discharged. 

 

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 
served on active duty from 23 April 1982 to 17 June 1984. 

 

On 3 May 1984, the applicant, while serving in the grade of 
airman first class (E-3), was notified of his commander’s intent 
to recommend him for a general (under honorable conditions) 
discharge for a pattern of misconduct. The specific reasons for 
the discharge were his receipt of a letter of counseling for 
failure to report for charge of quarters duty, a letter of 
reprimand for failing to properly service a government vehicle 
with a subsequent Unfavorable Information File entry, a civil 
court conviction for driving while intoxicated, six dishonored 
check notifications, and one dishonorable failure to pay a just 
debt owed. 

 

After acknowledging receipt of his commander’s intent, the 
applicant consulted counsel and waived his right to submit 
statements in his own behalf. On 10 May 1984, the Staff Judge 


Advocate found the case to be legally sufficient. On 25 May 
1984, the discharge authority approved the recommended discharge 
and directed the applicant be discharged without the offer of 
probation and rehabilitation. 

 

On 7 June 1984, the applicant was discharged with a general 
(under honorable conditions) discharge under the provisions of 
Air Force Regulation 39-10, paragraphs 5-47b and d. His 
narrative reason for discharge was “Misconduct – Pattern of 
Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline.” The applicant 
served 2 years, 1 month, and 15 days on active duty. 

 

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation (FBI), Clarksburg, WV, provided a copy of an 
Investigation Report (Exhibit C). 

 

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). 

 

The applicant responded with a personal statement, several 
character references, and course certificates. He indicates his 
misconduct while in the military was due to having a drinking 
problem. He has been sober for the past 18 years and has 
completed numerous self-improvement courses in hopes to be a 
productive citizen when he gets out of prison in 2016. 

 

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. 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, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to 
compel us to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis. 
Moreover, we note the applicant has had several arrests since his 
discharge and is currently incarcerated based on a conviction for 
battery with intent to commit sexual assault and three counts of 
sexual assault. 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-2011-04348 in Executive Session on 7 June 2012, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection 
with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-04348: 

 

Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 Oct 11, w/atch. 

Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

Exhibit C. FBI Report. 

Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 7 Mar 12, w/atch. 

Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, not dated, w/atchs. 

 

 

 

 

Panel Chair 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-02581

    Original file (BC-2010-02581.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant does not deny any of the charges against her or that an error or injustice occurred during the court-martial process. She was trying to get away from another abusive person. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04649

    Original file (BC-2011-04649.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC 2007 04120

    Original file (BC 2007 04120.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 28 February 1985, he was reprimanded for sleeping in class. 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 BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01484

    Original file (BC-2011-01484.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01484 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded. It would be offensive to all those who served honorably to extend the same benefits to someone who committed a crime such as the applicant’s while on active duty. While we are precluded by law...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC 2008 00528

    Original file (BC 2008 00528.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 18 May 1987, the applicant submitted an unconditional waiver of his right to an administrative discharge board hearing. On 2 October 1997, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge. On 22 May 2008, a copy of the FBI report was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00670

    Original file (BC-2008-00670.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The board recommended discharge without probation and rehabilitation. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we find no evidence of an error or injustice that occurred in the discharge processing. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 6 May 2008.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04266

    Original file (BC-2011-04266.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPSOS states the applicant has not filed a timely petition; it has been 29 years since his discharge from the Air Force. 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. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 February 2012.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00503

    Original file (BC-2011-00503.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who entered active duty on 15...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00013

    Original file (BC-2012-00013.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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-2011-00252

    Original file (BC-2011-00252.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00252 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). At the same time, the AFBCMR staff offered the applicant an opportunity to provide information pertaining to his activities since leaving the service (Exhibit D). Exhibit...