AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 
DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-00201 
COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING DESIRED:  YES 

IN THE MATTER OF: 
   
   
 
    
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
His  records  be  corrected  to  reflect  he  was  retired  in  lieu  of 
being discharged. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
He believes his commander’s decision to deny him retirement was 
unjust.  He served his country and the Air Force with commitment 
and  honor  for  21  years.    He  gave  his  all  and  very  best  during 
every occasion both before and after this unfortunate incident. 
 
His complete submission is at Exhibit A. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
On 17 Dec 85, the applicant contracted his initial enlistment in 
the  Regular  Air  Force.    He  was  progressively  promoted  to  the 
grade of master sergeant (MSgt). 
 
On  11  Mar  07,  the  applicant  while  driving  drunk,  struck  a 
pedestrian with his vehicle.  He failed to stop and assist the 
pedestrian  or  call  for  help.    The  pedestrian  survived  briefly, 
but later passed away.   
 
On  31  March  2009,  the  applicant  was  convicted  by  the  civilian 
authorities for felony motor vehicle homicide, felony leaving the 
scene  after  causing  death,  and  misdemeanor  operating  a  motor 
vehicle under the influence.   
 
On 25 Apr 09, the applicant was notified by his commander that he 
was  being  recommended  for  discharge  in  lieu  of  retirement  from 
the Air Force for a civil conviction.  The applicant was advised 
the  discharge  could  result  in  an  under  other  than  honorable 
conditions (UOTHC) discharge.  He was also advised of his right 
to apply for retirement IAW AFI 36-3203, Service Retirements, in 
which  he  would  receive  a  retirement  in  lieu  of  discharge  under 
AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen. 
 

On  30  Apr  09,  the  applicant  acknowledge  receipt  of  the 
notification  for  discharge  and  invoked  his  right  to  a  hearing 
before an administrative discharge board and to submit statement 
in his own behalf. 
 
On 8 May 09, the applicant submitted a conditional waiver to his 
right to have the case heard before an administrative discharge 
board contingent upon the receipt of a under honorable conditions 
(general) discharge.  On 23 Jun 09, the applicant’s request for a 
conditional waiver was denied and completion of the discharge was 
directed.    On  9 May  09,  the  applicant  submitted  a  request  to 
retire  in  lieu  of  discharge;  the  request  was  returned  to  the 
applicant  without  action  and  he  was  directed  to  submit  a  new 
application  upon  completion  of  the  discharge  process.    On 
26 Aug 09,  the  applicant  submitted  a  new  application  for 
retirement.   
 
The  legal  offices  conducted  a  legal  review  and  the  staff  judge 
advocates found the case legally sufficient to support separation 
and  recommended  UOTHC  discharge  without  probation  and 
rehabilitation. 
 
The applicant’s commander, wing commander and the vice commander 
recommended disapproval of the applicant’s request to retire in 
lieu of discharge. 
 
On  17  Mar  10,  the  Secretary  of  the  Air  Force  denied  the 
applicant’s request for retirement. 
 
On 12 Apr 10, the applicant was separated from the Air Force with 
an UOTHC discharge.  He served 24 years, 3 months and 26 days on 
active duty. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
AFPC/DPSOR  recommends  denial  noting  the  applicant  has  not 
provided any supporting documentation with his application.   
 
The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C.  
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
The  applicant  states  he  has  served  his  debt  to  society  without 
incident or complaint.  He believes the continued denial of his 
retirement would be unfair.  
 
In  support  of  his  request,  the  applicant  has  provided  seven 
character references and two newspaper articles. 
 

 

2 

The  applicant’s  complete  submission,  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 timely filed. 
 
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,  to  include  his 
rebuttal, 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.    Therefore,  in  the  absence 
of  evidence  to  the  contrary,  we  find  no  basis  upon  which  to 
recommend granting the relief sought. 
 
4.  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 issues involved.  
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
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-2012-00201 in Executive Session on 10 Oct 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

   Panel Chair 
   Member 
   Member 

 

 

3 

The  following  documentary  evidence  pertaining  to  AFBCMR  Docket 
Number BC-2012-00201 was considered: 
 
    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 Jan 12. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 28 Feb 12. 
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 May 12. 
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant’s Counsel, dated 23 May 12,  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

  
Panel Chair 

 w/atchs 

  

 

 
 

 
 

 

 
 

 
 

 

4