Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02776
Original file (BC-2012-02776.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:			   DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02776

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be 
upgraded to general under honorable conditions.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He believes the record is unjust because he served over seven 
years in the Air Force under honorable conditions.  There was 
one incident in his last four months of service that derailed 
his career and his life.  

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 22 May 1981.  
On 15 August 1988, his commander preferred charges against him 
for violating a lawful general regulation by wrongfully making 
personal solicitation of preparing tax returns for other Air 
Force members who were junior in rank, in violation of Article 
92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); and willfully 
aiding, assisting in, counseling, or advising the preparation or 
presentation of income tax returns for other Air Force members 
which were fraudulent or false as to material matters to wit:  
that these members had made contributions to individual 
retirement accounts, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ.

On 23 August 1988, the applicant, under advisement of counsel, 
requested that he be discharged from the Air Force in lieu of 
trial by court-martial.  The request was approved on 26 August 
1988.  The applicant was discharged on 12 September 1988 and his 
service was characterized as under other than honorable 
conditions. 

On 12 December 2012, a request for post-service information was 
forwarded to the applicant for response within 30 days.  As of 
this date, no response has been received by this office 
(Exhibit C).

________________________________________________________________

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. 
While the applicant contends the record is unjust because he 
served over seven years in the Air Force under honorable 
conditions, he voluntarily requested discharge in lieu of trial 
by court-martial at which time he acknowledged that he 
understood the adverse nature of service characterized as UOTHC  
and the possible consequences thereof. 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, in 
the absence of any evidence concerning his post-service 
activities, we do not find it would be in the interest of 
justice to upgrade the discharge on the basis of clemency.  
Therefore, in view of the above and 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-2012-02776 in Executive Session on 15 February 2013, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

				Panel Chair
				Member
			Member


The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2012-02776 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 Jun 12. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 12 Dec 12.




                                   
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04663

    Original file (BC 2013 04663.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In his request, the applicant indicated that he understood if his request was approved that he may be discharged with a UOTHC discharge and that he may be deprived of Veteran benefits. The applicant was discharged from active duty in the grade of technical sergeant effective 28 October 1988 with a UOTHC discharge under the authority of Air Force Regulation 39-10. ________________________________________________________________ _ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00201

    Original file (BC-2012-00201.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 9 May 09, the applicant submitted a request to retire in lieu of discharge; the request was returned to the applicant without action and he was directed to submit a new application upon completion of the discharge process. On 17 Mar 10, the Secretary of the Air Force denied the applicant’s request for retirement. On 12 Apr 10, the applicant was separated from the Air Force with an UOTHC discharge.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02884

    Original file (BC-2003-02884.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, his commanders recommended a UOTHC discharge. The applicant, while serving in the grade of sergeant, was discharged from the Air Force on 23 April 1992 under the provisions of AFR 39-10 (Request for Discharge in Lieu of Court-Martial) with an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge. The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of discharge on 25 January 1996.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04047

    Original file (BC-2010-04047.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04047 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Under Other than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-04047 in Executive...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04121

    Original file (BC-2012-04121.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04121 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to Honorable. Specifically, § 1552(f) permits the correction of a record to reflect actions taken by a reviewing authority under the UCMJ. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-03326

    Original file (BC-2012-03326.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03326 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). On 17 May 90, the Assistant Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support discharge and recommended...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01724

    Original file (BC-2012-01724.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01724 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) upgraded to honorable. On 11 Mar 88, the applicant was discharged with a reason for separation of request for discharge in lieu of trial by court- martial, with service characterized as...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03903

    Original file (BC-2012-03903.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03903 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to a general (under honorable conditions). In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01365

    Original file (BC-2007-01365.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01365 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NOT INDICATED HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 4 NOV 2008 ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His characterization of service be upgraded from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. The applicant has not shown the characterization of his discharge was contrary...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-05222

    Original file (BC-2012-05222.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requested discharge in lieu of court-martial and in that request, he acknowledged that he could be separated with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustice that occurred during the discharge process that warrants a change to his characterization of discharge. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the...