RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00513
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded
to honorable.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was discharged for exceeding the weight management standards.
His weight did not affect his job performance or duties.
The applicants complete submission is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 3 Jan 86, the applicant commenced his enlistment in the
Regular Air Force.
On 15 Jul 90, the applicants commander notified him that he was
recommending his discharge from the Air Force for unsatisfactory
performance. The reasons for the action were that his multiple
failures to meet the weight standards prescribed in the Weight
Management Program, for which he received three Letters of
Reprimand, Unfavorable Information File (UIF) entries, placement
on the control roster, and demotion to airman first class.
On 16 Jul 90, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the action
and waived his right to respond to the action.
The legal office reviewed the case and found it legally
sufficient and recommended he be furnished a general discharge
without probation and rehabilitation. The Staff Judge Advocate
cited the following derogatory information: The applicant
received an Article 15 for failing to obey a lawful order on 3
Jul 90. His punishment consisted of demotion to airman; and he
received a UIF/LOR for driving while intoxicated (DWI) off base
on 24 Jan 90.
On 16 Jul 90, the discharge authority directed the applicant be
furnished a general discharge without probation and
rehabilitation.
On 19 Jul 90, the applicant was furnished a general (under
honorable conditions) discharge and was credited with 4 years,
6 months, and 17 days of active service.
On 22 Oct 13, a request for post-service information was
forwarded to the applicant for 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 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. We considered
upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, in the
absence of any evidence for us to consider in determining
whether or not the applicants activities since leaving the
service are sufficient to overcome the misconduct for which he
was discharged, we are not inclined 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 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-2013-00513 in Executive Session on 21 Nov 13, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Jan 13, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records
Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 22 Oct 13.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00513
On 15 Jul 90, the applicants commander notified him that he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for unsatisfactory performance. The reasons for the action were that his multiple failures to meet the weight standards prescribed in the Weight Management Program, for which he received three Letters of Reprimand, Unfavorable Information File (UIF) entries, placement on the control roster, and demotion to airman first class. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00457
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00457 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 28 Apr 14, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C). THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03340
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03340 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded to Honorable. On 2 Feb 89, the applicant was furnished a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge for unsatisfactory performance and was credited with 1 year, 9 months, and 22 days of total active service. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 05166
On 9 Jan 12, after considering the applicants statement, the commander decided to file the LOR in his UIF.. On 13 Jan 12, according to documentation provided by the applicant, a general surgery provider indicated he was under the care of the General Surgery Clinic due to chronic recurrent problems with a pilonidal cyst during the period 10 Jan 12 thru 13 Jan 13. On 29 Jan 13, the applicants EPR, rendered for the period 21 Dec 11 thru 20 Dec 12, was referred to him for a rating of Does...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01042
On 30 Sep 10, the Board staff requested the applicant provide documentation concerning his activities since leaving military service (Exhibit D). 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 30 Sep 10, w/atch.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03563
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPWB recommended denial noting the applicant was administratively demoted from TSgt to SrA with a DOR of 15 Jul 03. His commander also served him with a letter of reprimand (LOR), established an unfavorable information file (UIF), and his name was placed on a control roster for this conviction. Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04035 (2)
In a letter dated 22 Oct 13, the demotion authority reinstated his grade to SSgt with his original Date of Rank (DOR) of 9 Jan 13. As such, if the applicant wants to make a request to remove the referral EPRs, he must first exhaust all available avenues of administrative relief provided by existing law or regulations, such as the Evaluation Report Appeals Board (ERAB) prior to seeking relief before this Board, as required by the governing Air Force Instruction. ...
On or about 22 Nov 85, he failed to progress satisfactorily in the Air Force WMP by gaining 10 pounds instead of losing the 5 pounds required. On 30 Jan 89, the commander, Air Refueling Wing, , received the proposed demotion case against the applicant and agreed with the applicant’s commander that demotion action was appropriate, effective 30 Jan 89. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed this application...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01601
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01601 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: Nov 24, 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2B be changed to a code which will allow him re-entry into the military. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in...
AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0116
PEKSUONAL APPEARANCE _| X RECORD REVIEW NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION * ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL MEMBERS SITTING ae, PT {ISSUES INDEX NUMBER BITS SUBMITE DAR A94.06, A93.10 A67.10 1 | ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD 2 | APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE — 3 | LETTER OF NOTIFICATION HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER 4 | BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE ° 02-08-15 FD2002-0116 COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF ™ PERSONAL APPEARANCE TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL...