Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05636
Original file (BC 2013 05636.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05636

					COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded 
to an Honorable Discharge.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He cannot take back his past actions, he does not want to have 
to explain to his children, who may want to join the military, 
why he does not have an honorable discharge. 

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 2 July 
1984.

On 28 May 1985, applicant was notified by his commander of his 
intent to recommend his discharge for Misconduct for Pattern of 
Minor Disciplinary Infractions under the provisions of AFR 39-
10, paragraph 5-46.  The reasons for the action are as follows:  
on 19 September 1984, the applicant received a Letter of 
Reprimand for being drunk on station; on 22 March 1985, he 
received an Article 15 for disorderly conduct, and on 10 May 
1985, he was found to again be drunk on station.

On 31 May 1985, after consulting with legal counsel, the 
applicant waived his right to submit statements or rebuttal.

On 14 June 1985, the applicant was furnished a general 
discharge, and was credited with 11 months and 1 day of active 
service.  

On 15 October 2014, a request for post-service information was 
forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 
30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this 
office. (Exhibit C).


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 based on 
clemency; however, in the absence of any evidence related to the 
applicant’s post-service activities, there is no way for us to 
determine if the applicant’s accomplishments since leaving the 
service warrant such consideration.  Therefore, in the absence 
of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis 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-2013-05636 in Executive Session on under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2013-05636 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 Dec 13.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 15 Oct 14, w/atch.


Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04476

    Original file (BC-2012-04476.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04476 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) characterization of discharge be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His discharge be upgraded to help him find suitable employment. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02230

    Original file (BC 2013 02230.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    In the interest of justice, the Board considered upgrading the characterization of the applicant’s discharge based on clemency; however, after considering his overall record of service and his post-service documentation, the Board majority did not find the evidence presented was sufficient to compel them to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 14 Feb 2014, w/atch. Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 4 Mar 2014, w/atchs.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04246

    Original file (BC-2012-04246.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04246 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The applicant acknowledged his commander’s intent, his right to legal counsel, to present his case before an administrative discharge board and to submit statements on his...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01690

    Original file (BC-2003-01690.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 5 November 1987 the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request to upgrade his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to an honorable discharge. The evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 18 July 2003, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05667

    Original file (BC 2013 05667.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 21 January 1985, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant submitted a statement in regards to the Article 15 action as to why his urinalysis test came back positive and a copy of an Air Force Times article. On 6 July 1988, the applicant applied to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to have his discharge upgraded to Honorable. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-03609

    Original file (BC-2012-03609.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 27 May 1983, the applicant reenlisted in the Regular Air Force. 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. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to compel us to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05805

    Original file (BC 2013 05805.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 post-service activities, there is no way for us to determine if the applicant’s accomplishments since leaving the service are sufficiently meritorious to overcome the misconduct for which he was discharged. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Oct 14.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00912

    Original file (BC-2004-00912.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The commander indicated his reasons for this action were the Article 15 actions and on 28 February 1985 to 22 April 1985, he was counseled numerous times on his bearing, behavior, reporting to duty on time, and AFR 35-10 violations. On 26 March 1986, the Staff Judge Advocate conducted a legal review and recommended the applicant be discharged with a general discharge and he not be afforded an opportunity for probation and rehabilitation. They indicated the Air Force Discharge Review Board...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04057

    Original file (BC-2002-04057.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 16 February 1984, the applicant received notification that he was being recommended for discharge for misconduct. On 13 March 1984, the discharge authority approved the recommended separation and directed that the applicant be issued a general discharge. On 3 March 1985, the applicant applied to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) to have his RE code of 2B changed.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00150

    Original file (BC-2013-00150.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00150 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was consistent with...