Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 02158 2
Original file (BC 2012 02158 2.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02158
					
   					COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be 
upgraded.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 6 December 2012, the Board considered and denied the 
applicant’s request that his UOTHC discharge be upgraded.  For 
an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the 
applicant’s separation and the rationale of the earlier decision 
by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings, with attachments, 
at Exhibit E.

In an application dated 11 February 2014, the applicant seeks 
reconsideration of his earlier request.  He states that the 
charges against him in his service personnel records are 
incorrect.  He believes his character of discharge is in error.  
He desires the upgrade to apply for Department of Veterans 
Affairs (VA) benefits.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit F.


THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

In earlier findings, the Board determined there was insufficient 
evidence to warrant any corrective action.  After thoroughly 
reviewing the additional documentation submitted in support of 
this appeal and the evidence of record, we do not believe the 
applicant has overcome the rationale expressed in the previous 
decision.  Therefore, we do not find the additional evidence 
presented is sufficient to warrant the relief sought on that 
basis.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no 
basis upon which to recommend favorable consideration of the 
applicant’s request.



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-2012-02158 in Executive Session on 1 June 2015, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:


The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit E.  Record of Proceedings, dated 28 January 2013,
	w/atchs.
   Exhibit F.  DD Form 149, dated 11 February 2014, w/atchs.

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC 2011 01529

    Original file (BC 2011 01529.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01529 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s request and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | BC 2001 02811

    Original file (BC 2001 02811.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 6 March 2002, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s request that his discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s separation and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings, with attachments, at Exhibit F. In an application dated 20 June 2014, the applicant seeks reconsideration of his earlier request. THE BOARD DETERMINES...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC 2011 04957

    Original file (BC 2011 04957.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 12 June 2012, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s request that his uncharacterized service be changed to honorable. For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s separation and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings, with attachments, at Exhibit F. In an application dated 11 February 2014, the applicant seeks reconsideration of his earlier request. In addition, he request his RE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC 2008 01877 2

    Original file (BC 2008 01877 2.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The provider diagnosed the applicant with [Major Depressive Disorder], PTSD. However, in consideration of the applicant’s post-service diagnosis of Major Depressive Disorder and PTSD, the indicators that he was experiencing significant family stressors, and his age and maturity at the time, leads the Medical Consultant to recommend an upgrade of his discharge to general (under honorable conditions) as a matter of clemency. Should the applicant provide additional evidence pertaining to his...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02158A

    Original file (BC-2003-02158A.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02158 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: Not Indicated _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: In his appeal for reconsideration, the applicant asks that his 1975 general discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: Sufficient relevant...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-00061A

    Original file (BC-2009-00061A.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 15 July 2009, the applicant's request that his UOTHC discharge be upgraded to honorable was considered and denied by the Board. For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s request, and, the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit F. On 12 August 2009, the applicant submitted a request for reconsideration. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03740-2

    Original file (BC-2012-03740-2.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s appeal and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board - see Exhibit D. In a letter to the Board dated 8 May 2013, received by the AFBCMR staff on 12 June 2013, the applicant states since being discharged from the Air Force he has worked 35 years as a crane operator. Therefore, we do not find the additional evidence presented is sufficient to warrant the relief sought on that basis. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02158

    Original file (BC 2013 02158.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Denying his degree is excessive punishment for his actions. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant was a cadet at the USAFA Air Force Academy from 26 June 2006 through 13 May 2013. The basis of the applicant’s disenrollment is sufficient to deny his degree from the USAFA.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 05184 2

    Original file (BC 2012 05184 2.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05184-2 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect his name as XXX XXX and he be issued a DD Form 215, Correction to DD Form 214. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit G. On 28 February 2014, AFPC/DPSIRP issued an AF IMT 281, Notification of Change in Service Members Official...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03156 ADDENDUM

    ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: A similar appeal was considered and denied by the Board on 5 June 2012. After thoroughly reviewing the additional documentation submitted in support of his appeal and the evidence of record, we do not believe the applicant has overcome the rationale expressed in our previous decision. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified...