RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02903
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general discharge be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was stationed in Nevada; a member of two championshipbasketball teams, and was the 1983 Airman of the Year, 1983;
however, poor training and a jealous sergeant led to his
discharge.
The applicants complete submission is at Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 1 Jun 81, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force fora period of four years.
On 9 Mar 83, the squadron commander notified the applicant ofadministrative discharge action for a pattern of misconduct.
For a full list of the offenses, please see the commandersnotification letter at Exhibit B. After consulting with counseland having been advised of his rights, the applicant submittedstatements in his own behalf. The staff judge advocate foundthe case file legally sufficient and recommended the applicantreceive a general discharge without probation and rehabilitation(P&R). On 29 Mar 83, the discharge authority approved thegeneral discharge without P&R.
On 30 Mar 83, the applicant was discharged by reason of
misconduct pattern of minor disciplinary infractions, withservice characterized as general (under honorable conditions).
He was credited with 1 year and 10 months of active duty
service.
Other relevant facts pertaining to this application, extractedfrom the applicant's military records, are at Exhibit B.
Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in thisRecord of Proceedings.
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided byexisting law or regulations.
2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in theinterest 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 ofthe case; however, we find no evidence of an error or injusticethat occurred during the discharge process. Based on the
available evidence of record, it appears the discharge wasconsistent 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 tobelieve the characterization of the service was contrary to theprovisions of the governing regulation, unduly harsh, or
disproportionate to the offenses committed. Considering theapplicants overall record of service, the numerous infractionswhich led to his administrative separation and the lack of postservice
documentation, we are not persuaded that an upgrade ofthe characterization of his discharge is warranted on the basisof clemency. Should the applicant provide additional
information, e.g., post-service documentation to support hisclaim, we would be willing to reconsider his request.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we findno basis upon which to recommend granting the relief sought.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has notbeen shown that a personal appearance with or without counselwill materially add to our understanding of the issue involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorablyconsidered.
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; theapplication was denied without a personal appearance; and theapplication will only be reconsidered upon the submission of
2
newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with thisapplication.
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR DocketNumber BC-2012-02903 in Executive Session on 14 Feb 13, underthe provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 22 Jun 12.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Panel Chair
3
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02951
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial, noting that the TEB program wasnot in effect at the time of the applicants retirement on30 Jun 08. She has not provided any evidence of an error or injustice on the part of the Air Force. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Aug 12.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03246
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03246 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 5 Apr 83, the applicant was discharged for Misconduct-Pattern of Minor Disciplinary Infractions with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). In the...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-04303
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-04303 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 21 Mar 85, the squadron commander notified the applicant of administrative discharge board (ADB) action for minor disciplinary infractions,...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00129
Dereliction of duty--willful failure to report marijuana use by other Air Force members, between 1 Mar 82 and 30 Sep 82. Failure to report to duty, on or about 14 Apr 82. On 17 May 83, the applicant was furnished a General (Under Honorable Conditions) Discharge for misconduct—a pattern of misconduct prejudicial to good order and discipline and credited with 3 years, 9 months, and 21 days of service.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04552
On 5 Jun 1984, his commander notified him that he was still recommending his discharge without probation and rehabilitation under the same provisions, however, due to further evidence presented to him by the SJA, he recommended that his service be characterized as general. On 16 Jul 1984, the applicant was discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions) in the grade of airman. ________________________________________________________________ The following...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02159
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02159 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 11 Jun 1984, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force, with a general discharge. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01300
The applicants complete submission is at Exhibit A. For the first time in history, service members enrolled in thePost-9/11 GI Bill Program are able to transfer unused educational benefits to their dependent spouses or children. While we note the comments of NGB/A1PSindicating the applicants squadron did not receive the Post9/11 GI Bill Informational Briefing until after the applicanthad retired, we also note the applicant never out-processedthrough the Retention Office Manager (ROM),...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00330
DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00330 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His character of service be changed from general, under honorable conditions (UHC) to honorable. On 7 Aug 84, the applicant applied to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (DRB) to have his UOTHC discharge upgraded to honorable. In our view, the...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03053
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03053 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded 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 recommend granting relief on that basis. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 13 Mar 15, w/atchs.
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...