RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02314
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded
to honorable.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was never afforded an opportunity to undergo rehabilitation
like other service members with similar circumstance. He has
become a model citizen, obtained his Bachelor of Science
(BS) degree and received several academic awards.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of his
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release and Discharge from Active
Duty, issued in conjunction with his 18 Jul 85 separation;
Associates and Bachelor of Science degree certificates, and
other supporting documents.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 14 Dec 79, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force
for a period of four years.
On 20 Jun 85, the squadron commander notified the applicant of
administrative discharge action for a pattern of misconduct.
The specific reasons for the proposed action were:
On 22 Jan 85, he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for being
incapable of performing his assigned duties because he had been
drinking. On 18 May 85, he received an Article 15 for being
incapable of performing his assigned duties, resulting from
wrongful previous overindulgence of intoxicating liquor or
drugs. His punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of
airman first class with a Date of Rank (DOR) of 31 May 85.
After consulting with counsel and having been advised of his
rights, the applicant waived his right to submit statements in
his own behalf. The staff judge advocate found the case file
legally sufficient and recommended the applicant receive a
general discharge without P&R. On 11 Jul 85, the discharge
authority approved the general discharge without P&R.
On 18 Jul 85, the applicant was discharged by reason of
misconduct pattern discreditable involvement with military and
civilian authorities, with service characterized as general
(under honorable conditions). He was credited with five years,
seven months, and five day of active duty service.
The applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board
(AFDRB) to have his discharge upgraded; however, the AFDRB
denied his application. They concluded the discharge was
consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of
the discharge regulation, was within the discretion of the
discharge authority (see AFDRB Hearing Record at Exhibit B).
________________________________________________________________
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, unduly harsh, or
disproportionate to the offenses committed. We considered
upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not
find sufficient evidence to persuade us that an upgrade to a
fully honorable discharge is warranted on that basis.
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-2012-02314 in Executive Session on 15 January 2013,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 24 May 12, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01951
On 22 April 1998, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request that his general discharge be upgraded to honorable (Exhibit B). 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. We considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to compel us...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-00887
On 1 May 85 and 18 Nov 93, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered the applicant’s appeal to have her discharge upgraded; however, they concluded that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discharge authority’s discretion, and denied her requests. Additionally, the applicant’s discharge was supported by three (3) Letters of Reprimand, three (3) Letters of Counseling, and other documents...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00498
The base legal office reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support separation and recommended the applicants request for discharge be approved and that she receive an UOTHC discharge without probation and rehabilitation. On 25 Apr 83, the discharge authority approved the applicants request for discharge and on 6 May 83, she was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen, Chapter 4, Request for Discharge in Lieu of Trial...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00694
The applicant was discharged on 26 March 1986. On 7 March 2013, a request for information pertaining to his post-service activities was forwarded to the applicant for review and response. 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.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00369
DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00369 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. They concluded the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, was within the discretion of the discharge...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-05564
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05564 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions (UHC)) discharge be upgraded to 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 01525
On 28 Oct 98, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied the applicants request to upgrade his discharge to honorable. 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 C. Letter, BCMR Medical Advisor, dated 14 Dec 12.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04270
The remaining relevant facts, extracted from the applicants military service record, are contained in the evaluation by the Air Force office of primary responsibility at Exhibit C. On 26 March 2013, the applicant was given an opportunity to submit comments about his post-service activities (Exhibit E). In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency and considered the applicant's overall post-service activities and accomplishments; however, the evidence...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02996
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02996 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) code of 2C, which denotes Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service, be changed to 1A, which denotes ineligible to reenlist, but condition...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2005-02810
His records be corrected to reflect entitlement to the Combat Readiness Medal (CRM) and the Basic Military Training Honor Graduate Ribbon (BMTHGR). He is determined to pursue a military career with the ARNG, and would like to demonstrate to them that his service in the USAF was ultimately considered honorable. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial of the applicant’s request for award of the CRM and BMTHGR.