Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03450
Original file (BC 2013 03450.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-03450

			COUNSEL:  NONE

			HEARING DESIRED: NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her general (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of 
service be upgraded to Honorable.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She is grateful for the time spent in the service and would have 
liked to complete her enlistment.  Her life has changed for the 
better.  She is more mature and has accomplished a lot in life.  

In support of her request, the applicant submits copies of her 
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, personal statement, and letters of recommendation.  

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A. 

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

1.  According to documents extracted from her military personnel 
record, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 
1 September 1982.  She served as an Apprentice Passenger and 
Household Goods Specialist.  

2.  On 9 June 1983, the applicant’s commander notified her that 
he was recommending her for discharge under the provisions of 
Air Force Regulation (AFR) 39-10, Discharge-Expiration of 
Enlistment or Required Service and General Provisions, 
paragraphs 5-12 and 5-46.  The specific reason for the discharge 
recommendation was minor disciplinary infractions that were 
inconsistent with acceptable Air Force standards evidenced by 
administrative actions she received for incidences of failures 
to report to duty on time, nonjudicial punishment under Article 
15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for her 
failure to go at the time prescribed to her appointed place of 
duty, and a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) with an Unfavorable 
Information File (UIF) entry in her record for making a false 
official statement which alleged sexual assault.  On 
17 March 1983, the applicant was diagnosed as having a 
Histrionic Personality Disorder, which the clinical psychologist 
found to be supportive for administrative discharge.  

3.  On 9 May 1983, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the 
notification of discharge and was advised of her right to 
consult military legal counsel and submit statements for 
consideration. She opted to consult counsel and submit a 
statement in her behalf.  

4.  Subsequent to the file being found legally sufficient, the 
discharge authority approved the separation and directed the 
applicant be discharged with a general (under honorable 
conditions) characterization of service.  The applicant was 
released from active duty on 24 May 1983 and was credited with 8 
months and 24 days of active duty service.  

5.  On 24 February 2014, the applicant was given an opportunity 
to submit comments regarding her post service activities 
(Exhibit C).  

6.  In further support of her request, the applicant submits a 
personnel statement, letters of recommendation and her college 
transcripts (Exhibit D).  She expresses that she was aware that 
she wanted to serve in the Armed Forces since she was 15 years 
old.  She was a member of the “delayed entry program” for two 
years and in September 1982, she finally had the chance to 
serve.  She only received one disciplinary write-up during basic 
training and that was for her hair being below her collar.  She 
was selected to be a “Duty Rope” at technical training school 
and was responsible for organizing her fellow Airmen.  The 
applicant reiterates her contentions regarding the stressful 
experiences that caused her to “get in trouble” at her first 
duty station.  She states that, given the opportunity, she 
believes she would have been a beneficial soldier.   

________________________________________________________________

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.  
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.  In the 
interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based 
on clemency and considered the applicant's overall post-service 
activities, letters of character reference, and accomplishments; 
however, the evidence submitted was not sufficient to compel us 
to recommend granting the relief sought 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 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 this application 
in Executive Session on 1 April 2014, under the provisions of 
AFI 36-2603:

		, Panel Chair
		, Member
		, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2013-03450 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149 dated 16 July 2013, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR dated 24 February 2014, w/atch.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, dated 17 March 2014, w/atchs.

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04323

    Original file (BC-2012-04323.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04323 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The applicant acknowledged her commander’s intent, her right to legal counsel and to submit statements on her behalf. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02255

    Original file (BC 2013 02255.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02255 COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to “honorable.” ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was exonerated by a judge from Washington. In the interest...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9703450

    Original file (9703450.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    When a member fails to complete an SBP election prior to retirement, coverage is established for all eligible beneficiaries by operation of law. Title 10 USC Section 1448 (a) (3) requires that the spouse of a married member must concur in any election that provides less than full spouse SBP coverage. The statement from the member's husband concurring in her election to decline coverage is inappropriate in that he does not clearly acknowledge retired pay ceases when the member dies, that he...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00476

    Original file (BC 2014 00476.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Upon final board decision, administrative correction of the applicant’s official military personnel record will be completed by AFPC/DPSOR. The consultation report shows a statement referring the reader to a February 1982 progress note that indicates she experienced “back pain since age 14.” Although the applicant’s service treatment record separation history and physical indicates she experienced a number of somatic complaints nearing the time of her release from military service, it could...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00201

    Original file (BC 2014 00201.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her former spouse informed her that he did not elect her as his survivor beneficiary when he received his 20 year letter and election form. Subsection 1448 (b)(3)(A)(iii), “Manner and time of election - any such election must be written, signed by the person making the election, and received by the Secretary concerned within one year after the date of the decree of divorce, dissolution, or annulment.” They have no record of the applicant or the military member...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00479

    Original file (BC-2004-00479.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00479 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her under honorable conditions (general) discharged be upgraded to honorable. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02998

    Original file (BC 2013 02998.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, there is no evidence either party submitted a valid former spouse election during the required time following their divorce. Neither the applicant nor the former spouse submitted a valid election within the one-year period required by law to establish former spouse coverage. Exhibit D. Letter, Member, dated 3 Sep 2013, w/atch.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03450

    Original file (BC 2014 03450.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03450 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C). 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01465

    Original file (BC-2012-01465.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01465 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Total Federal Commissioned Service Date (TFCSD) be adjusted to remove all periods assigned to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) and Standby Reserve. On 21 July 1992 she requested separation, which was approved and completed effective 30 September...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01198

    Original file (BC-2013-01198.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01198 COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for separation (Misconduct – Pattern of Minor Disciplinary Infractions) be changed. While the applicant states the punishment he received was unfair, he has not provided any evidence which would lead us to believe...