Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04107
Original file (BC-2012-04107.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04107 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded 
to honorable. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

As result of a physical altercation with his wife, he was 
arrested and received nonjudicial punishment. He was scared and 
accepted the discharge based on the advice he received from his 
first sergeant. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 12 Nov 87, the applicant commenced his enlistment in the 
Regular Air Force. 

 

On 19 Mar 91, the applicant’s commander notified him he was 
recommending his discharge from the Air Force for misconduct. 
The reasons for the action were that he received a Letter of 
Reprimand (LOR) for failing to report and non-judicial 
punishment under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military 
Justice (UCMJ) for physically assaulting his wife. 

 

On 19 Mar 91, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant 
acknowledged receipt of the action and waived his rights to 
submit a statement in his own behalf. 

 

On 27 Mar 91, the applicant was furnished a general (under 
honorable conditions) discharge and credited with 3 years, 
4 months, and 16 days of total active service. 

 

On 29 Mar 13, a request for post-service information was 
forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 
days (Exhibit C). As of this date, no response has been 
received by this office. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 


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 an 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 in the discharge processing. 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 his service and narrative reason 
for separation was contrary to the provisions of the governing 
regulation, unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses 
committed. In the interest of justice, we also considered 
upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, in the 
absence of any evidence related to his activities since leaving 
the service, we are not inclined to recommend granting the 
requested relief 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 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-2012-04107 in Executive Session on 14 May 13, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

 

 

 

 

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2012-04107 was considered: 


 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 31 Aug 12. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Mar 13, w/atch. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01031

    Original file (BC-2012-01031.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibits B and C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFRC/SGP recommends denial. The complete SGP evaluation is attached at Exhibit B. AFRC/A1K states that, absent a medical determination from an authoritative medical source validating the medical condition presented by the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 05669

    Original file (BC 2012 05669.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists to grant the relief sought in this application. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-05669 in Executive Session on 19 Sep 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-05669 was considered: Exhibit A. DD...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05669

    Original file (BC 2012 05669.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists to grant the relief sought in this application. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-05669 in Executive Session on 19 Sep 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-05669 was considered: Exhibit A. DD...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04404

    Original file (BC-2012-04404.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04404 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His “undesirable” discharge be upgraded to Honorable. On 16 Jun 54, the applicant received an Article 15 for “failure to repair.” On 23 Jun 54, the applicant’s commander recommended him for discharge based upon his conviction in civilian court. On 14...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02160

    Original file (BC-2012-02160.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02160 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded to Honorable. While the applicant contends her two years of service merit an honorable discharge, we find no evidence or an error or injustice that occurred in the discharge process. It...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00403

    Original file (BC-2012-00403.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, he was not awarded the AFOR-ST, but qualifies for it based upon having served in Korea from May 73 to Nov 74. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPAPP recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of error or injustice. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00432

    Original file (BC-2012-00432.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The complete AFPC/DPSIAR evaluation is at Exhibit B. SAF/MRB Legal Advisor recommends denial of the applicant’s request as this case presents the Board with competing interests between the former spouse and the applicant. Given the competing interests and the absence of a valid, timely election, the Board should follow the long standing SAF/GCM guidance not to correct an existing record when "the result would be unfavorable to another person eligible to seek relief from the BCMR.” The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03839

    Original file (BC-2012-03839.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFD recommends denial. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00146

    Original file (BC-2012-00146.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A retiring member may change his SBP election up to the date of separation. The member elected spouse and child SBP coverage based on full retired pay on 16 Jun 2011. However, on 30 Nov 2011, one day prior to his 1 Dec 2011 retirement, he changed his election to decline SBP coverage and his wife concurred with his election.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00424

    Original file (BC-2013-00424.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Article 15 punishment included a demotion to the grade of airman first class (E-3) with a date of rank of 11 October 2007. His correct RE code is 4E in accordance with Air Force Instruction 36-2601, Reenlistment in the United States Air Force. Every other member of the Air Force that does not meet the appropriate grade for their time in service separates with a 4E or 4D RE code depending on their rank.