AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 
DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-00511 
COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING DESIRED: NO 

IN THE MATTER OF: 
   
   
 
    
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
1. His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded 
to honorable. 
 
2. He be awarded any service medals for his deployment. 
 
3.  His  foreign  service  be  updated  for  his  service  in  Southwest 
Asia. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
He  was  advised  that  he  could  request  a  change  to  character  of 
service on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge 
from Active Duty, after several years had passed.  Additionally, 
he  was  deployed  in  support  of  DESERT  SHIELD  in  1988  and  never 
received service awards for that deployment.  The Department of 
Veterans  Affairs  (DVA)  employment  office  advised  him  that  his 
records could be corrected. 
 
In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his 
DD Form 214. 
 
His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.  
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
The applicant enlisted into the Regular Air Force on 15 May 85.   
 
The  applicant  was  notified  by  his  commander  of  his  intent  to 
recommend his discharge from the Air Force under the provisions 
of  AFR  39-10,  Chapter  5,  Section  H,  paragraph  5-47b,  for  a 
pattern  of  misconduct  –  conduct  prejudicial  to  good  order  and 
discipline.    After  a  legal  review,  the  deputy  staff  judge 
advocate  found  the  case  legally  sufficient  and  recommended 
discharge.  The applicant received a general (UHC) discharge on 
1 Nov 89 after serving 4 years, 5 months, and 17 days on active 
duty. 

 
 

On 2 Aug 12, a request for information pertaining to his post-
service  activities  was  forwarded  to  the  applicant  for  response 
within  30  days.    As  of  this  date,  this  office  has  received  no 
response. 
 
The  SWASM  criteria:    This  award,  authorized  by  Executive  Order 
12754, 12 Mar 91, is awarded to members of the U.S. Armed Forces 
who served in support of Operations Desert Shield or Desert Storm 
between 2 Aug 90 and 30 Nov 95 in one or more of the following 
areas: Persian Gulf, Red Sea, Gulf of Oman, Gulf of Aden, that 
portion  of  the  Arabian  Sea  that  lies  north  of  10  degrees north 
latitude  and  west  of  68  degrees east  longitude,  and  the  land 
areas of Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Bahrain, Qatar and the 
United  Arab  Emirates;  or  individuals  serving  in  Egypt,  Israel, 
Turkey,  Syria  and  Jordan  (including  territorial  airspace  and 
waters) directly supporting combat operations between 17 Jan 91 
and 30 Nov 95.  
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial of awarding the applicant the SWASM 
based on the fact that the Directorate of Assignments was unable 
to  locate  any  documentation  substantiating  foreign  service.  
Although  the  applicant  was  not  specific  on  the  award  he  is 
requesting, they believe he is referring to the SWASM.  Further, 
the applicant was released from active duty before the start date 
of Operation DESERT SHEILD (ODS). 
 
The complete DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit C. 
 
AFPC/DPAPP recommends denial of correcting the applicant’s record 
to  reflect  he  served  in  ODS  based  on  the  fact  that  his  record 
does not reflect any foreign service time. 
 
The complete DPAPP evaluation is at Exhibit D. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
In a personal statement, the applicant provided a resume of his 
accomplishments  since  he  left  the  Air  Force.    He  also  provides 
many certificates of recognition. 
 
This  applicant’s  complete  submission,  with  attachments,  is  at 
Exhibit G. 
 
______________________________________________________________ 
 
 
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

 

2 

 
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  regarding  the 
applicant’s  request  to  have  his  discharge  upgraded.    In  this 
respect, 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  his  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 recommend granting the relief sought on that basis.  
With  regard  to  the  applicant’s  request  to  be  given  foreign 
service credit and awarded service medals for service he claims 
to  have  performed  during  a  deployment,  other  than  his  own 
assertions,  we  have  seen  no  evidence  by  the  applicant  to 
substantiate  this  claim.    Consequently,  we  agree  with  the 
opinions and recommendations of the Air Force office of primary 
responsibility  and  adopt  their  rationale  as  the  basis  for  our 
conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error 
or  injustice.    Therefore,  in  the  absence  of  evidence  to  the 
contrary,  we  find  no  basis  to  recommend  granting  the  relief 
sought in this application. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
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-2012-00511 in Executive Session on 21 Aug 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 

 

3 

  Panel Chair 
  Member 
  Member 

 
 
 
 
 
The following documentary evidence was considered: 
 
    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 Jan 12, w/atch. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIDR, dated 3 May 12. 
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPAPP, dated 2 Apr 12. 
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 May 12. 
    Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 2 Aug 12. 
 
 
 
 
                                    
                                   Panel Chair 
 

 

4