Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04967
Original file (BC-2011-04967.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04967 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded 
to Honorable. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

The Air Force told him his discharge would be upgraded to 
Honorable after 6 months. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant entered active duty on 21 Sep 81. 

 

On 27 May 83, his commander notified him she was recommending 
him for discharge from the Air Force for minor disciplinary 
infractions. The reasons for the proposed discharge were: 

 

 a. On 9 Mar 82, he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for 
verbally abusing two female Airmen and committing an obscene 
gesture toward them. 

 

 b. On 26 Mar 82, he received an Article 15 for being drunk 
on duty, disorderly on station, and damaging government 
property. 

 

 c. On 2 Apr 82, he received an Article 15 for disobeying a 
lawful order and also violating a lawful general regulation. 

 

 d. On Mar 83, he received an LOR due to being involved in 
an affray and damaging government property. 

 

 e. On 18 Feb 83, he submitted a commander-directed urine 
specimen which returned positive for marijuana. 

 


 f. On 13 May 83, he received an Article 15 for disobeying a 
lawful order. 

 

 g. On 28 Apr 83, he submitted a commander-directed urine 
specimen which returned positive for marijuana. 

 

The member acknowledged his right to counsel and to submit a 
statement on his own behalf. After consulting counsel, he 
submitted a statement on 1 Jun 83. 

 

His commander recommended his discharge. On 13 Jun 83, the case 
was reviewed and found to be legally sufficient, and the 
discharge authority directed his discharge on 20 Jun 83. 

 

On 5 Jul 83, he was furnished a General (Under Honorable 
Conditions) discharge for misconduct—pattern of minor 
disciplinary infractions, and was credited with 1 year, 
9 months, and 14 days of active service. 

 

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 5 Mar 12, a copy of the FBI Investigative Report and a 
request for post-service information was forwarded to the 
applicant 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 the case; however, we do not find the documentation 
presented sufficient to conclude the applicant has been the 
victim of an error or injustice. Based on the available 
evidence of record, it appears the applicant’s General (Under 
Honorable Conditions) discharge for misconduct was consistent 
with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation 
and within the discharge authority’s discretion. He has 
provided no evidence which would lead us to believe otherwise. 
In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading his 
discharge on the basis of clemency; however, in the absence of 
any evidence for us to consider in determining whether his post-
service accomplishments were sufficient to overcome the 
misconduct that formed the basis of his discharge, we are not 


inclined to grant the relief sought on that basis. Therefore, 
in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no 
basis exists for us to recommend granting the relief sought in 
this 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-2011-04967 in Executive Session on 19 Jul 12, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Dec 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. FBI Report. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Mar 12. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 

 

 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0101270

    Original file (0101270.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although he received an overall rating of 8 on his performance report, the comments of his reporting official indicated that he had difficulties in maintaining standards as required by AFR 35-10. f. Substandard duty performance (20 Jan 82 - 31 May 92). The Board requested applicant provide additional evidence pertaining to his post-service activities (see Exhibit F). However, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force based on the facts that existed at the time of his separation.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-03234

    Original file (BC-2008-03234.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 22 Jun 84, the board agreed with the findings and recommendations of the applicant’s commander. 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. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, not dated.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03875

    Original file (BC-2005-03875.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005- 03875 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 23 JUNE 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201252

    Original file (0201252.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He received an LOR on 7 Apr 82 for failing to report for duty on 3 April 82. On 17 May 83, after consulting with counsel, the applicant requested discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his UOTHC discharge should be upgraded to honorable or general.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01991

    Original file (BC-2005-01991.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01991 INDEX CODE: 106.00, 100.05 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 24 Dec 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214 reflect an Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) of 81150 rather than 81130, and his 1985 discharge be upgraded from general to honorable. According to his Enlisted...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03301

    Original file (BC-2007-03301.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-03301 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 3 Oct 78, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01665

    Original file (BC-2009-01665.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    To date, no response to this request has been received. 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. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 10 Jul 09.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00129

    Original file (BC-2012-00129.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Dereliction of duty--willful failure to report marijuana use by other Air Force members, between 1 Mar 82 and 30 Sep 82. Failure to report to duty, on or about 14 Apr 82. On 17 May 83, the applicant was furnished a General (Under Honorable Conditions) Discharge for misconduct—a pattern of misconduct prejudicial to good order and discipline and credited with 3 years, 9 months, and 21 days of service.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00785

    Original file (BC-2008-00785.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-00785 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions discharge (UOTHC) be upgraded to a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, not dated. Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 30 Apr 08.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9801328

    Original file (9801328.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The discharge complied with directives in effect at the time and records indicate his military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and indicated that, while in the Air Force, he had frequent problems with the people who shared his barracks. DOUGLAS...