AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02256
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
IN THE MATTER OF:
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded
to honorable.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She was not offered a chance for counseling for her erroneous
ways. She was only offered a court-martial or discharge.
The applicant provides no supporting documentation.
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 10 July 1991.
On 17 January 1992, she requested, upon advisement of counsel,
that she be discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial.
Specifically, the applicant’s commander referred charges against
her for uttering 17 checks for a total amount of about $1900
without sufficient funds, in violation of Article 134, Uniform
Code of Military Justice. The staff judge advocate found the
request legally sufficient and recommended the commander approve
the request. On 23 January 1992, the commander approved the
request for discharge and separated her with an under other than
honorable conditions discharge. She was credited with 6 months
and 14 days of active duty service.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. Subsequent to the applicant’s
voluntary request for discharge in lieu of court-martial, she
received an Article 15 for sleeping on post. Based on the
documentation in her master personnel record, the discharge was
consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of
the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the
discharge authority. The applicant did not submit any evidence
or identify any errors or injustices that occurred during the
discharge process warranting a change to her characterization or
narrative reason for separation.
The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 22 August 2012, for review and comment within
30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, this office has received
no response.
________________________________________________________________
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 processing/approval of her request for
discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. In the interest of
justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on
clemency; however, there was no evidence submitted 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 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:
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.
________________________________________________________________
2
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2012-02256 in Executive Session on 14 November 2012,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dtd 20 May 12.
Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Record.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dtd 6 Aug 12.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dtd 22 Aug 12.
Panel Chair
3
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01029
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01029 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her separation (SPD) code “HDG” (involuntary convenience of the Government) and her reentry (RE) code “2C” (involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service) be changed to allow her...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 03711
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03711 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her date of separation of 1 Jun 04, be changed to a date after 19 Jul 04. To date, a response has not been received (Exhibit D). Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Oct 12.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-02825
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02825 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her uncharacterized entry level separation be changed to honorable. DPSOS states that based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-03814
On 7 Jul 86, the applicant was discharged with service characterized as honorable and narrative reason for separation as Pregnancy in the grade of airman first class. The applicant has not provided any facts warranting a change to her separation code or narrative reason for separation. We took notice of the applicants complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01205
On 28 January 2009, the applciant was notified of her commander’s intent to recommend her for discharge for mental disorders. DPSOS states that based on the documentation on file in the applicant’s master personnel record, her discharge, to include the character of service, was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02921
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02921 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be reinstated in the United States Air Force. A commander can determine if a members use of a substance was improper or wrongful based on the circumstances of the use. DPSOS states that based on the documentation on file in the master personnel...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC 2011 01546
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01546 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. DPSOS notes had the Air Force known of the applicants condition at the time of her enlistment, she would have been denied entry in military service. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02099
She was discharged from the Air Force because she failed training and the Air Force would not reclassify her. Her commander initiated separation action on 11 Mar 2010, which gave her 178 days active duty at the time her separation action was initiated. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC- 2012-02099 in Executive Session on 20 Dec 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC 2011 01180
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01180 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel record, the applicant was discharged for not making satisfactory progress in a required training program. We took notice of the applicants complete submission in judging the merits...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02116
The applicant contends he is innocent of the charges preferred and asserts that, by deductive reasoning, he has identified who the confidential informant must have been, and that individual now recants any statement he may have made to the Air Force Office of Special Investigation regarding whether the applicant every smoked Spice in his presence. A complete copy of the AFLOA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the applicants request to have his referral EPR...