RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04000 

 

 COUNSEL: NO 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

1. His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be 
upgraded to honorable and his separation program designator 
(SPD) and Re-entry (RE) codes be revised to allow him reentry 
into military service. 

 

2. His records be corrected to reflect his foreign service. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

1. His records confirm that he was involved in one incident 
during his military service and does not demonstrate a pattern 
of minor disciplinary infractions. 

 

2. He was deployed during Operation Desert Shield/Storm from 
2 August 1990 through 23 February 1991 and he should be credited 
with the appropriate foreign service. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant’s military personnel records indicate he enlisted 
in the Regular Air Force on 14 May 1990. 

 

On 13 September 1991, the applicant’s commander notified him 
that he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for 
Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary Infractions. The reasons for 
the action were as follows: 

 

 a) During the period 18 through 23 June 1991, the 
applicant obtained services under false pretenses/unauthorized 
telephone service for which he received non-judicial punishment 
under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice on 10 
July 1991. 

 


 b) On 6 September 1991, the applicant was in violation of 
Air Force Regulation (AFI) 35-10 for which is received a record 
of individual counseling on 9 September 1991. 

 

 c) On 03 September 1991, the applicant failed to go at the 
time prescribed to his appointed place of duty for which 
resulted in the vacation of his suspended non-judical Punishment 
issued on 10 July 1991. 

 

 d) On 9 September 1991, the applicant disobeyed a lawful 
order by failing to pay a just debt for which he received a 
letter of reprimand/unfavorable information file on 10 September 
1991. . 

 

On 13 September 1991, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the 
action and, after consulting with legal counsel, waived his 
right to submit a statement in his own behalf. 

 

On 18 September 1991, the case was found to be legally 
sufficient. 

 

On 20 September 1991, the discharge authority directed the 
applicant be furnished a general discharge, without probation 
and rehabilitation. 

 

On 25 September 1991, the applicant was furnished a general 
(under honorable conditions) discharge and was credited with 
1 year, 4 months, and 12 days of total active service. 

 

On 26 January 2001, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) 
considered and denied the applicant’s request to upgrade his 
discharge, concluding that his discharge was consistent with the 
procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge 
regulation, was within the discretion of the discharge 
authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative 
due process. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPAPP recommends denial of the applicant’s request for 
foreign service credit beyond the two months and one day 
reflected on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or 
Discharge From Active Duty, indicating the only evidence of 
foreign service in the applicant’s record is a paid travel 
voucher relating to duty he performed in the United Kingdom. 

 

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPAPP evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIO: 

 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation and a request for post-
service information was forwarded to the applicant on 29 April 
2013 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no 
response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 with respect to 
the applicant’s discharge. 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 process. Based on the available evidence of 
record, it appears the applicant’s General (Under Honorable 
Conditions) discharge for misconduct – minor disciplinary 
infractions were consistent with the substantive requirements of 
the discharge regulation and within the commander’s 
discretionary authority. He has provided no evidence which 
would lead us to believe the characterization of his service was 
improper or contrary to the provisions of the governing 
directive. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading 
the discharge based on clemency; however, in the absence of any 
evidence related to the applicant’s activities since leaving the 
service, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief 
sought on that basis. As for the request related to the 
applicant’s foreign service, we agree with the opinion and 
recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility 
(OPR) and adopt their rationale as the basis for our opinion the 
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice with 
respect to his foreign service. Therefore, in the absence of 
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 the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2012-04000 in Executive Session on 4 June 2013, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 Panel Chair 

 Member 

 Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 June 2012. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 23 April 2013, w/atch. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair