RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02966
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded tohonorable.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Since the incident he has had a complete change of character.
His volunteer work and actions in his current and previous jobsreflect overall improvement.
He received many performance awards as a government contractor.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is atExhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 27 Jun 85, the applicant entered active duty in the RegularAir Force.
On 8 Apr 88, the applicant was notified by his squadron commanderthat he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force forconduct prejudicial to good order and discipline. The basis for
the proposed action were: 1) On 4 Jan 87, he received a Letterof Counseling (LOC) for being derelict in his duties; 2) On17 and 24 Mar 87, he received a Letter of Reprimands (LORs) forbeing derelict in his duties; (3) On 8 Apr 87, he received anArticle 15 for unlawfully making a false statement while underoath and failure to go; and (4) On 8 Mar 88, he received anArticle 15 for being an accomplice to larceny of Governmentproperty.
On 8 Apr 88, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the
notification of discharge and, waived his right to consult withlegal counsel and submit a statement in his own behalf.
The base legal office reviewed the case and found it legallysufficient to support separation and recommended that he receivea general discharge without probation and rehabilitation.
On 17 May 88, the applicant was discharged under the provisionsof AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen, for
Misconduct-Pattern of Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order andDiscipline, and received a general discharge. He served on
active duty for a period of 2 years, 10 months and 21 days.
On 9 Jan 90, the applicant applied to the Air Force DischargeReview Board (AFDRB) requesting that his discharge be upgraded tohonorable. After reviewing the evidence of record, the AFDRBconcluded that no change in his discharge was warranted.
Pursuant to the request of the Board on 3 Aug 12, the FederalBureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, indicated on7 Aug 12, that, on the basis of the data furnished, they wereunable to locate an arrest record.
On 31 Dec 12, a request for information pertaining to his postservice
activities was forwarded to the applicant for responsewithin 30 days (Exhibit C). As of this date, no response hasbeen received by this office.
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existinglaw 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. After
thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we find no evidenceto indicate that his discharge from the Air Force was
inappropriate, or that the actions taken to affect his dischargeand the characterization of his service were improper, contraryto the provisions of the governing regulations in effect at thetime, or based on factors other than his own behavior andinability to comply with standards. In the interest of justice,
we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however,
we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to recommendgranting the relief sought on that basis. In the absence of
persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to
recommend granting the relief sought in this application.
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did notdemonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; thatthe application was denied without a personal appearance; andthat the application will only be reconsidered upon the
submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not consideredwith this application.
2
The following members of the Board considered Docket NumberBC-2012-02966 in Executive Session on 14 Feb 13, under theprovisions of AFI 36-2603:
Panel Chair
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Jun 12, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 31 Dec 12.
Panel Chair
3
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00319
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD AFSN/SSAN PERSONAL APPEARANCE x RECORD REVIEW NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL MEMBER SITTING HON GEN UOTHC | OTHER | DENY na x my | eC x Fe x XxX INDEX NUMBER A67.90 A94.05 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE LETTER OF NOTIFICATION iQ Th [a BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD HEARING DATE 24 Sep 2003 CASE...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00891
On 14 Jan 87, he failed to comply with dormitory standards, for which he was furnished a Letter of Reprimand (LOR). On 26 Feb 88, he failed to go to a scheduled social 2 On 6 Apr 88, the applicant was furnished a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge for Misconduct—Pattern of Minor Disciplinary Infractions, and was credited with 2 years, 10 months, and 22 days of active service. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The...
AF | DRB | CY2005 | FD2005-00082
Prior Sv: (1) AFRes 21 Apr 81 - 9 Sep 81 (4 months 20 days) (Inactive). (Change Discharge to Honorable, and Change the Reason and Authority for Discharge) Issue 1: Unsubstantiated allegations. addition to military counsel, you have the right to employ civilian counsel.
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00137
‘DATE: 28 JUL 03° CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD2003-00137 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. The misconduct included disrespect of a noncommissioned officer, failure to go, failed room inspection, dereliction of duty, failure to follow priority procedures, late for duty, and failure to obey a lawful regulation. For this offense you received a Letter of Reprimand on 4 Jan 89. h. On 22 Sep 88 you were derelict in the...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01036
On 6 Jun 89, the applicant was discharged and received a general discharge. On 27 Feb 97, the Air Force Discharge Review Board denied the applicants request for an upgrade of his discharge. After careful consideration of the available evidence, the discharge appears to be in compliance with the governing regulations in effect at the time and we find no evidence to indicate the applicants separation from the Air Force was inappropriate.
On or about 22 Nov 85, he failed to progress satisfactorily in the Air Force WMP by gaining 10 pounds instead of losing the 5 pounds required. On 30 Jan 89, the commander, Air Refueling Wing, , received the proposed demotion case against the applicant and agreed with the applicant’s commander that demotion action was appropriate, effective 30 Jan 89. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed this application...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 01168
In support of his request, applicant provided a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. On 10 Sep 90, the applicant appeared before the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his general discharge be upgraded to honorable. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 8 May 09.
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01168
In support of his request, applicant provided a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. On 10 Sep 90, the applicant appeared before the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his general discharge be upgraded to honorable. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 8 May 09.
On 31 May 90, applicant was found guilty by his commander who imposed the following punishment: Reduction from the grade of sergeant to the grade of airman first class, forfeiture of $560 pay a month for two months, and 30 days’ correctional custody. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Military Personnel Management Specialist, AFPC/DPPRS, also reviewed this application and indicated that this case has been reviewed and the discharge was consistent with...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1997-02832
On 31 May 90, applicant was found guilty by his commander who imposed the following punishment: Reduction from the grade of sergeant to the grade of airman first class, forfeiture of $560 pay a month for two months, and 30 days’ correctional custody. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Military Personnel Management Specialist, AFPC/DPPRS, also reviewed this application and indicated that this case has been reviewed and the discharge was consistent with...