Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00651
Original file (BC-2012-00651.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00651 
COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

 
IN THE MATTER OF: 
   
    
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to 
an honorable discharge.   
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
He  has  been  discharged  for  over  20  years  and  hopes  he  has  a 
chance at an honorable discharge.  He knows that when he served 
alcohol to minors at a party, that it was wrong; however, he was 
immature at the time and has since learned from his mistake.  He 
is a good upstanding citizen with a good family and job; and, is 
pursuing a college degree.  He is well known and volunteers in 
his community, and is well-respected at his job.  He would like 
to  apply  for  a  home  loan  through  the  Department  of  Veterans 
Affairs and feels an honorable discharge would make it easier.   
 
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides three character 
references.   
 
The  applicant's  complete  submission,  with  attachments,  is  at 
Exhibit A. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
The  applicant  is  a  former  member  of  the  Regular  Air  Force  who 
served as a Security Specialist and was promoted to the grade of 
senior airman (E-4).   
 
On  15  March  1990,  the  applicant  was  notified  by  his  commander 
that  he  was  recommending  the  applicant  for  a  general  discharge 
under the provisions of Air Force Manual 39-12, paragraph 5-47b, 
for  a  pattern  of  misconduct.    The  commander  cited  the  four 
Letters of Reprimand (LOR), two Letters of Counseling (LOC) and 
one verbal counseling the applicant received during the period of 
22  February  1987  and  14  February  1990.    The  applicant 
acknowledged  receipt  of  the  commander’s  intent  and  after 
consulting counsel, submitted a conditional waiver requesting an 
honorable  discharge  in  lieu  of  having  a  board  of  officers  be 
appointed to consider his separation from the service.  On 14 May 
1990,  after  the  Acting  Staff  Judge  Advocate  considered  the 

applicant’s  conditional  release  and  recommended  the  commander 
deny  the  applicant’s  request  for  an  honorable  discharge  as 
inappropriate, the commander disapproved the applicant’s request 
for a conditional waiver.   
 
On 5 June 1990, the Acting Staff Judge Advocate found the case to 
be legally sufficient.  On 6 June 1990, the discharge authority 
approved  the  applicant’s  general  discharge  without  probation  or 
rehabilitation.   
 
The  applicant  was  discharged  from  active  duty  in  the  grade  of 
senior  airman  effective  11  June  1990  with  a  general  (under 
honorable  conditions)  discharge.    His  narrative  reason  for 
separation  was  “Misconduct-Pattern  Conduct  Prejudicial  to  Good 
Order and Discipline.  He served 7 years, 2 months, and 19 days 
on active duty.   
 
Pursuant  to  the  Board’s  request,  the  FBI  indicated  that  on  the 
basis of the data furnished, they were unable to locate an arrest 
record pertaining to the applicant. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
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 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  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  the  service  was  contrary  to  the 
provisions  of  the  governing  regulation,  unduly  harsh,  or 
disproportionate  to  the  offenses  committed.    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.    Therefore, 
in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon 
which to recommend granting the relief sought 
 ________________________________________________________________ 
 

 

2

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-2012-00651  in  Executive  Session  on  20  September  2012, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 

 
 
 

  Panel Chair 
  Member 
  Member 

 
The  following  documentary  evidence  pertaining  to  AFBCMR  Docket 
Number BC-2012-00651 was considered: 
 

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 Feb 12, w/atchs. 
Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 
 
 
 
 
 

 

  
  

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

  
Panel Chair 

3



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00838

    Original file (BC 2013 00838.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ _ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who served on active duty from 1 June 1987 to 13 June 1990. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, the Board finds no evidence of an error or injustice that occurred in the discharge processing. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00651

    Original file (BC-2005-00651.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, the applicant’s base driving privileges were suspended. In addition, based on his overall record of service, the contents of the FBI Report of Investigation, and the absence of evidence related to his post-service activities and accomplishments, we are not persuaded that an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge is warranted on the basis of clemency. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Mar 05.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00016

    Original file (BC-2012-00016.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The specific reason for the proposed action was: Between 21 Apr 93 and 7 Sep 94, the applicant had one instance of disorderly conduct; one instance of voluntarily riding in a vehicle being driven by an individual who was under the influence of alcohol; one instance of AFR 35-10, Dress and Personal Appearance of Air Force Personnel violation, and one instance of failing to report to the Senior Enlisted Advisor when asked to. On 5 Oct 94, the Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) reviewed the case and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01359

    Original file (BC-2009-01359.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. 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. ________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00018

    Original file (BC-2012-00018.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 23 Sep 1971, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force, with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. 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. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04322

    Original file (BC-2010-04322.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04322 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge characterization be changed to honorable and his grade of airman basic (AB/E-1) be changed to senior airman (SrA/E-4). He received a letter from Social Actions for failure to rehabilitate. The applicant...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02339

    Original file (BC-2012-02339.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02339 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04766

    Original file (BC-2012-04766.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04766 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His character of service on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be changed from general to honorable or uncharacterized. The reasons for the discharge action were he received three Letters of Reprimand (LORs) for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00198

    Original file (BC-2008-00198.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-00198 INDEX CODE: 106.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 9 June 1983, the applicant was notified of his commander's intent to recommend him for a general discharge for misconduct – minor...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02198

    Original file (BC-2012-02198.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02198 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 25 Nov 83, the applicant was discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions) in the grade of airman first class. On 2 Jul 84, the Air Force...