Search Decisions

Decision Text

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. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

She believes her two years of service merit an honorable 
discharge. She is considering enlisting in the National Guard 
and she needs the upgrade to complete the process. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant initially entered the Air Force on 16 Aug 90. 

 

On 13 Oct 92, the applicant’s commander notified her that she 
was recommending her for discharge from the Air Force for minor 
disciplinary infractions. The reasons for this action were: 

 

 a. On 11 Mar 91, she was found to be delinquent in paying 
her NCO Club bill, for which she received a letter of 
counseling. 

 

 b. On 12 Apr 91, she was found to be delinquent in paying 
her NCO Club bill for which she received a letter of counseling. 

 

 c. On 3 May 91, she was negligent in operating a 
government vehicle and caused damage to the vehicle, for which 
she received a letter of counseling. 

 

 d. On 16 May 91, she was found to be delinquent in paying 
her NCO Club bill for a third straight month, for which she 
received a letter of counseling. 

 


 e. On 6 Jun 91, she was negligent in operating a 
government vehicle and caused damage to the vehicle, for which 
she received a Letter of Reprimand. 

 

 f. On 12 Jun 91, she was found to be delinquent in paying 
her NCO Club bill for a fourth straight month, for which she 
received a Letter of Reprimand. 

 

 g. On 12 Nov 91, she was found to be delinquent in paying 
her NCO Club bill, for which she received a Letter of Reprimand. 

 

 h. Between 21 May 92 and 20 Jun 92, she falsely pretended 
to her roommate that she would not make long distance calls on 
her roommate’s phone, and then made $1,244.28 of long distance 
calls on her roommate’s account, for which she received an 
Article 15, was reduced in rank, and restricted to base for 30 
days. 

 

On 16 Oct 92, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the action 
and, after consulting with legal counsel, elected to submit a 
statement on her own behalf. 

 

The applicant’s commander recommended she be discharged from the 
Air Force for minor misconduct, and on 21 Oct 92 the case was 
determined to be legally sufficient. 

 

On 22 Oct 92, the discharge authority directed the applicant be 
discharged for minor disciplinary infractions without probation 
and rehabilitation and directed her service be characterized as 
general. 

 

On 2 Nov 92, the applicant was furnished a General (Under 
Honorable Conditions) discharge for “Misconduct—Pattern of Minor 
Disciplinary Infractions,” issued a Reentry (RE) Code of “2B,” 
and was credited with 2 years, 8 months, and 27 days of total 
active service. 

 

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation (FBI) provided a copy of an Investigative Report, 
which is at Exhibit C. 

 

On 1 Oct 12, a copy of the FBI Investigative Report and a 
request for post-service information was forwarded to the 
applicant for review and comment 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 do not find the documentation presented 
sufficient to conclude the applicant has been the victim of an 
error or injustice. 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 appears the applicant’s general (under honorable conditions) 
discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of 
the discharge regulation in effect at the time and within the 
commander’s discretionary authority. No evidence has been 
presented to indicate otherwise. In the interest of justice, we 
considered upgrading her discharge on the basis of clemency; 
however, in the absence of any documentary evidence for us to 
consider in determining whether her post-service accomplishments 
were sufficient to overcome the misconduct that formed the basis 
of her discharge, we are not inclined to recommend granting the 
relief sought on that basis. Therefore, in the absence of 
evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists for 
us to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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-2012-02160 in Executive Session on 7 Feb 13, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

 


The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2012-02160 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Apr 12. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. FBI Report. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 1 Oct 12, w/atch. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-02889

    Original file (BC-2009-02889.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of injustice regarding the applicant’s request that her general discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 16 February 1993, she was honorably discharged and furnished an Honorable Discharge certificate. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01914

    Original file (BC-2006-01914.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The specific reasons for this action were on 3 Jun 87, he received a Letter of Counseling for engaging in a fight with his roommate; on 18 May 05 he failed to return five video tapes in a timely manner to a local video store; on 5 May 87, he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for passing counterfeit bills on two separate occasions; on 9 Mar 87, he received an LOR for writing a worthless check; on 18 Feb 87, he received an LOR for writing another worthless check; on 6 Feb 87, he received an...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00931

    Original file (BC-2011-00931.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 27 Apr 83, the applicant was discharged and received a general discharge. Having found no error or injustice with regard to the actions that occurred while the applicant was a military member, we conclude that no basis exists to grant favorable action on her request. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0101270

    Original file (0101270.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although he received an overall rating of 8 on his performance report, the comments of his reporting official indicated that he had difficulties in maintaining standards as required by AFR 35-10. f. Substandard duty performance (20 Jan 82 - 31 May 92). The Board requested applicant provide additional evidence pertaining to his post-service activities (see Exhibit F). However, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force based on the facts that existed at the time of his separation.

  • AF | DRB | CY2007 | FD2006-00308

    Original file (FD2006-00308.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE CASE NllMRFR FD-2006-00308 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable. In view of the foregoing findings, the Board further concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed. SGQF LTR, 25 OCT 91 - Returned check notification.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 0001730

    Original file (0001730.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 10 Aug 53, he was reduced to the grade of Airman 3rd Class under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ, for failure to report at appointed time to his place of duty and making a false statement. On 25 Oct 54, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (DRB) examined and reviewed the applicant’s request for discharge upgrade and concluded that the evidence submitted was insufficient to warrant a change in the type or nature of his discharge, and accordingly denied his request (see Exhibit C). ...

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0376

    Original file (FD2002-0376.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE CASE NUMHER FD2002-0376 GENERAL: The applicant appeals f'or upgrade of discharge to honorablc. CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. For the Government: A preponderance of the evidence establ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-03497

    Original file (BC-2006-03497.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03497 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 18 May 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The bases for the recommendation were: (1) she received an Article 15 for failure to go. ...

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00186

    Original file (FD2003-00186.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE | 5593.01 86 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. (Change Discharge to Honorable) ISSUES ATTACHED TO BRIEF. a, ee ROE » Lt Col, USAF 14 Atch Commander, 379 SPS - 1.

  • AF | DRB | CY2004 | FD2004-00208

    Original file (FD2004-00208.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Attachment: Examiner's Brief DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD (Former AMN) (HGH AlC) 1. The authority for this action is AFR 39-10, paragraph 5-46, If my recornendation is approved, your service will be characterized as honorable or general. For this you received a letter of counseling. '