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.
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
During the time period in question, he was under duress due to a
divorce and was not able to focus on the task at hand. He
regrets his actions during that time. For the last 20 years he
has been a productive citizen and has not had any issues with
the legal system.
The applicant provides no documentation in support of his
appeal.
The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
_
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 15 March
1983.
The applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to
recommend that he be discharged from the Air Force under the
provisions of AFR 39-10 (Unsatisfactory Performance). The
specific reasons follow:
a. The applicant received two Letters of Reprimand (LORs)
for being late for work three times between the dates of
29 October 1984 and 2 November 1984. He was also late on
8 November 1984 and 9 November 1984.
b. The applicant received three Letters of Counseling
(LOCs) for failing to complete assigned duties in a timely
manner, failing to properly complete assigned duties, and for
being 25 minutes late for duty.
He was advised of his rights in this matter and elected not to
provide a statement on his own behalf. In a legal review of the
case file, the assistant staff judge advocate found the case
legally sufficient and recommended discharge. The discharge
authority concurred with the recommendation. The applicant was
discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge
on 22 July 1985. He served 2 years, 4 months and 8 days on
active duty.
________________________________________________________________
_
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 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, based on the evidence before us, we find no
basis to grant clemency at this time. 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 an 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-2013-00150 in Executive Session on 17 October 2013,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 31 December 2012.
Exhibit B. Applicants Master Personnel Records.
2
3
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04486
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04486 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 26 November 1984, the applicant was furnished a general (under honorable conditions) discharge and was credited with 4 years, 8 months, and 13 days of total active service. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04250
As of this date, this office has received no response. 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. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 26 March 2013.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02764
The applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to recommend his discharge from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10 (Misconduct - Drug Abuse). The discharge authority concurred with the recommendation and directed a general discharge. On 4 September 1997, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicants request that his general discharge be upgraded to honorable.
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00157
In support of his appeal, he has provided copies of two VA Form 21-4138s, Statement in Support of Claim, a DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States, two letters from the American Legion submitting his application, a personal statement, his DD Form 214, his rebuttal to his discharge, the reverse side of an Airman Performance Report (APR) with comments and signatures dated 28 December 1984, a letter from the discharge authority directing...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04246
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 commanders intent, his right to legal counsel, to present his case before an administrative discharge board and to submit statements on his...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00120
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00120 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. He served 5 years, 5 months and 27 days on active duty and credited with 2 years, 9 months and 4 days of foreign service. We took notice of the applicant's complete...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02431
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02431 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the characterization of the applicants discharge based on clemency; however, after considering his overall record of...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00694
The applicant was discharged on 26 March 1986. On 7 March 2013, a request for information pertaining to his post-service activities was forwarded to the applicant for review and response. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03216
On 3 Feb 1998, he was discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions) with a narrative reason for separation of Misconduct. He served 6 months and 18 days on active duty. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the characterization of the applicants discharge based on clemency; however, after considering his overall record of service, the infractions which led to his administrative separation and the post-service documentation provided by the...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02505
On 10 March 1988, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicants request that his UOTHC discharge be upgraded to general. 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. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 June 2014.