Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00478
Original file (BC-2012-00478.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-00478 
COUNSEL: NONE 
HEARING DESIRED:  YES 

 
 
IN THE MATTER OF: 
 
    
 
    
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to 
honorable. 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
His  commander  told  him  that  she  did  not  want  a  black  man 
receiving the same benefits that she would be entitled to.  His 
discharge was racially unjust and unfair. 
 
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 20 Aug 85 for 
a term of four years and was progressively promoted to the grade 
of  sergeant.    On  29  Dec  92,  the  applicant’s  commander  notified 
him that she was recommending he be discharged from the Air Force 
for Misconduct - Pattern of Minor Disciplinary Infractions.  The 
reasons for the action included two occasions of failure to go, 
two instances of violation of regulation, one instance of conduct 
unbecoming  of  a  noncommissioned  officer,  for  which  he  received 
five  letters  of  reprimand,  three  letters  of  counseling,  an 
unfavorable  information  file  (UIF),  and  entry  on  the  Control 
Roster. 
 
The  applicant  acknowledged  receipt  of  the  notification  of 
discharge and waived his rights to consult with legal counsel and 
to submit statements in his own behalf.   
 
The  base  legal  office  reviewed  the  case  and  found  it  legally 
sufficient  to  support  the  applicant’s  general  (under  honorable 
conditions)  discharge  for  Misconduct  –  Pattern  of  Minor 
Disciplinary Infractions. 
 
 
On  29  Jan  93,  the  applicant  was  furnished  a  general  (under 
honorable  conditions)  discharge  in  accordance  with  AFR  39-10, 
 
 

Administrative  Separation  of  Airmen,  for  a  Pattern  of  Minor 
Disciplinary Infractions, and was credited with seven years, five 
months, and ten days of total active service. 
 
Pursuant  to  the  Board's  request,  the  Federal  Bureau  of 
Investigation (FBI), provided a copy of an Investigation Report, 
which is at Exhibit C. 
 
On  7  Sep  12,  a  copy  of  the  FBI  report  and  a  request  for  post-
service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and 
response 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 find no evidence of an error or 
injustice that occurred in the discharge process.  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  his 
general  (under  honorable  conditions)  discharge  was  improper  or 
contrary  to  the  provisions  of  the  governing  directive.    In  the 
interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based 
on clemency; however, in the absence of any evidence related to 
his activities since leaving the service, we are not inclined 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 in this application. 
 
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: 
 

 

2 
 

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-2012-00478 in Executive Session on 31 Oct 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 
 
 
 
 
The following documentary evidence was considered: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 Jan 12. 
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 
Exhibit C. FBI Investigative Report. 
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 7 Sep 12, w/atch. 

  Panel Chair 
  Member 
  Member 

  
Panel Chair 

 

3 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00854

    Original file (BC-2012-00854.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS c. Three Letter of Debt Complaints/Dishonored Check DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00854 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded to Honorable. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the applicant’s General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04967

    Original file (BC-2011-04967.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. ________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02160

    Original file (BC-2012-02160.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02160 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded to Honorable. While the applicant contends her two years of service merit an honorable discharge, we find no evidence or an error or injustice that occurred in the discharge process. It...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01955

    Original file (BC-2012-01955.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He assumed his discharge was upgraded until he requested his records on 2 Nov 2011. 2 On or about 5 Sep 1986, he failed to perform quality On or about 16 Oct 1987, he failed to report to work. 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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02159

    Original file (BC-2012-02159.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02159 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 11 Jun 1984, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force, with a general discharge. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-03863

    Original file (BC-2010-03863.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS On 30 Jan 92, the applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to recommend his discharge from the Air Force for Misconduct—Minor Disciplinary Infractions, under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-03863 in Executive Session on 14 Jul 11, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03035

    Original file (BC-2011-03035.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    For these actions he received a LOR, which was placed in his UIF. On 2 Feb 12, a copy of the FBI report and a request for post- service information were forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). While the applicant only references his civilian conviction for DUI as the basis for his discharge, it was but one of several issues which formed the basis for his administrative discharge for a pattern of misconduct, to include committing carnal knowledge with a...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02409

    Original file (BC-2011-02409.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02409 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02843

    Original file (BC-2007-02843.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 9 Aug 82, he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for failing to report for duty at the appointed place and time. d. On 15 Sep 82, he received an LOC for failing to adequately support his dependent. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-01797

    Original file (BC-2010-01797.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The base legal office reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support the discharge. The discharge authority approved the separation and directed he be discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the applicant’s general (under honorable conditions) discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the commander’s discretionary authority.