Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01195
Original file (BC-2012-01195.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
 

   DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01195 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING DESIRED: NO 

         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 
 
IN THE MATTER OF:   
 
   
 
   
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
His under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
He  met  a  young  lady  at  the  Airman’s  Club  on  base.    She  had  a 
fake  dependent  identification  card.    He  did  not  know  the 
identification card was a fake.  He was three years older than 
she  was.    They  were  married  in  December  1991  and  divorced  in 
March 1996.  They have three children and eight grandchildren. 
 
The applicant submits no supporting documentation. 
 
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
The  applicant  enlisted  in  the  Regular  Air  Force  on  20  August 
1984.  On 31 December 1986, the applicant’s commander preferred 
charges against him for violation of Article’s 109, 120 and 134, 
Uniform  Code  of  Military  Justice.    Specifically,  the  applicant 
was charged with carnal knowledge, wrongfully damaging property 
of  another  and  making  a  false  statement.    The  applicant 
requested  a  discharge  in  lieu  of  court-martial;  his  commander 
and  the  staff  judge  advocate  concurred  with  the  request.  On 
12 February  1987,  the  commander  directed  the  applicant  be 
separated  with  an  under  other  than  honorable  conditions 
discharge.  He was credited with 2 years, 6 months and 13 days 
of active duty service. 
 
On 27 February 1989 the Air Force Discharge Review Board denied 
the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge. 
 
Pursuant  to  the  Board’s  request,  the  Federal  Bureau  of 
Investigation,  Clarksburg,  West  Virginia  provided  a  copy  of  an 
investigation report (Exhibit C). 
 

On 28 August 2012, the FBI investigation and a request for post-
service information were forwarded to the applicant for 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 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  during  the  discharge  process.    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,  or  unduly  harsh.  
Additionally, due to the lack of evidence of a successful post-
service  adjustment  and  in  view  of  the  information  contained  in 
the FBI investigative report, we do not find it would be in the 
interest  of  justice  to  upgrade  his  discharge  on  the  basis  of 
clemency.    Therefore,  in  the  absence  of  evidence  to  the 
contrary, we find no basis upon which to recommend granting the 
relief sought. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
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-2012-01195  in  Executive  Session  on  16  October  2012, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 
 
 
 

  Panel Chair 
  Member 
  Member 

  
  
 

 
 
 

2 

 
 
The  following  documentary  evidence  pertaining  to  AFBCMR  Docket 
Number BC-2012-01195 was considered: 
 
    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 28 Mar 12.  
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 
    Exhibit C.  FBI Investigative Report. 
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 28 Aug 12. 
 
 
 
 
                                    
                                   Panel Chair 

 

3 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 01526

    Original file (BC 2012 01526.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01526 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was told his discharge would be upgraded to honorable six months after his...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01606

    Original file (BC-2010-01606.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01606 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The Air Force never provided him with the appropriate diagnosis, education or treatment. On 1 October 1985, the discharge authority determined that a general discharge was...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00666

    Original file (BC-2010-00666.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00666 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to an Honorable discharge. We considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to convince us to recommend...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-02864

    Original file (BC-2009-02864.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-02864 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The applicant was discharged on 3 Jun 81. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 1 Dec 09.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01162

    Original file (BC-2012-01162.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01162 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 18 July 2012, the FBI investigation and a request for post- service information were forwarded to the applicant for response within 30 days. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01820

    Original file (BC-2012-01820.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01820 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions) or honorable. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00744

    Original file (BC-2012-00744.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. 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. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 19 Jun 2012.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03007

    Original file (BC-2005-03007.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 10 December 1990, the applicant submitted a request to his commander that he be discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial. On 2 August 1991, the applicant submitted an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFRDB) requesting his discharge be upgraded to general. We have reviewed the evidence provided and are unable to conclude corrective action is warranted based on an injustice.

  • 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. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00246

    Original file (BC-2012-00246.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evaluation officer recommended the applicant be discharged and be given a general discharge and that his request for an upgrade to honorable be considered due to his excellent on duty work record. 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 following...