RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05603
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be
upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was attacked by his subordinate because she was upset that he
was talking to another woman. Subsequently, he was charged with
assault. He was only protecting himself and did not initiate or
want to fight.
The applicant did not provide any evidence in support of his
request.
The applicants complete submission is at Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 12 Feb 82, the applicant reenlisted in the Regular Air Force
for a period of four years.
The applicants military personnel records did not contain a copy
of his discharge package. Therefore, the following information
was extracted from the AFHQ Form 0-2077, Air Force Discharge
Review Board (AFDRB) Hearing Record dated 12 Dec 86:
On or about 16 May 82, the applicant was derelict in the
performance of his duties in that he failed to ensure the dining
hall was secure, upon closing as it was his duty to do. For this
misconduct, he was given Nonjudiical Punishment (NJP) under
Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) consisting of
forfeiture of $100 pay per month for two months and reduction in
grade to sergeant (suspended until 25 Nov 82).
On or about 23 Oct 83, the applicant assaulted a subordinate by
striking her in the face and body with his fists. For this
misconduct, he was given NJP under Article 15, UCMJ, consisting of
forfeiture of $150 pay per month for two months and reduction in
grade to sergeant.
On 8 Jun 84, the applicant was notified of his commanders intent
to recommend he be discharged from the Air Force under the
provisions of AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen,
paragraph 5-47b, Misconduct Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order
and Discipline. The specific reason for the proposed action was
the applicant's Article 15s for failing to secure a building and
assaulting a female under his supervision. Before recommending
discharge the commander noted he reviewed the applicants records.
However, his prolonged misbehavior and intermittent substandard
performance lead him to recommend discharge rather than further
rehabilitation. The commander noted the applicants four Article
15s and Letter of Reprimand should have provided sufficient
impetus for rehabilitation. Additionally, the commander noted
that further rehabilitation attempts would not be any more
effective than past corrective actions had been. Specifically,
the applicants last incident (assault) indicated the applicant
was not fit to supervise and therefore, not fit to be retained in
the Air Force. The commander did not recommend probation and
rehabilitation.
On 27 Sep 84, the Staff Judge Advocate found the case legally
sufficient to support discharge and recommended the applicant
receive an UOTHC discharge without the offer of probation and
rehabilitation.
On 19 Oct 84, the discharge authority approved the applicants
discharge. On 26 Oct 84, the applicant was discharged for
Misconduct Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline with
service characterized as UOTHC in the grade of senior airman. He
was credited with 12 years, 1 month and 12 days of total active
service.
On 15 Aug 85, the applicant submitted a DD Form 293, Application
for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of
the United States, requesting his UOTHC discharge be upgrade to
general (under honorable conditions).
On 12 Dec 86, the AFDRB considered and denied the applicants
appeal. The AFDRB found that the discharge was consistent with
the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge
regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge
authority and he was provided full administrative due process. On
8 Jan 87, the applicant was notified of the AFDRBs decision.
Pursuant to the Boards request, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI) indicated that on the basis of the information
provided, they were able to locate an arrest record.
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 the service was contrary to the
provisions of the governing regulation, unduly harsh, or
disproportionate to the offenses committed. In the interest of
justice, we considered upgrading the discharge on the basis of
clemency; however, after considering his overall record of
service, the infractions which led to his administrative
separation and the lack of post-service information we are not
persuaded that an upgrade is warranted on that basis. In view of
the above and 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-2013-05603 in Executive Session on 18 Sep 14, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Panel Chair
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Mar 12.
Exhibit B. Applicants Available Personnel Records.
3
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03507
On 7 Oct 92, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied the applicant’s request for upgrade of his discharge to honorable. They also noted applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing and provided no other facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge. After careful consideration of the evidence of record, we found no evidence that the actions taken to effect the applicant’s discharge were improper or...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01323 INDEX CODE: 100.03, 100.06 APPLICANT COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2C be upgraded. In support of his request applicant has provided a letter from AFPC/DPPRRB, dated 24 Mar 00, announcing the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) decision to...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03370
The applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to have his discharge upgraded to honorable. On 14 Nov 11, the Board staff requested the applicant provide documentation concerning his activities since leaving military service (Exhibit D). _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-03370 in Executive Session on 12 Apr 12, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02867
On 24 Feb 97, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request to have his discharge upgraded to honorable. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 15 Oct 04 for review and comment within 30 days. Based on his overall record of service, the contents of the FBI...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-1984-04083A
On 13 Oct 83, his commander recommended discharge. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant contends, as a diabetic herself, that her husband’s elevated blood sugar episode was not properly followed up by the Air Force. Review of service and DVA medical records through 1992 show no evidence of diabetes, and evaluation by DVA physicians also indicate no...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-1991-02293A
On 13 Oct 83, his commander recommended discharge. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant contends, as a diabetic herself, that her husband’s elevated blood sugar episode was not properly followed up by the Air Force. Review of service and DVA medical records through 1992 show no evidence of diabetes, and evaluation by DVA physicians also indicate no...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03053
On 30 Aug 82, the applicant submitted an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable conditions discharge. The AFDRB reviewed all the evidence of record and concluded that there was no basis for upgrade of the discharge. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not...
AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0226
ISSUES: The applicant was discharged with a General Discharge for Misconduct - Pattern of Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline, The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropnety or inequity in this case on which to base an upgrade of discharge. IT alse Jéad Lhe SWAT Team and have duties as a training officer, AflLer over five years with my previous employer, 1 held the rank of Sergeant with thal. frei 2RE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 7020 SECURITY POLICE...
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02807
Applicant was discharged from the Air Force on 7 Jun 85. He petitioned the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to upgrade his discharge to honorable in 1993. We find no evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we do not believe he has been the victim of an injustice.