RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01179
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded
to Honorable.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was not properly diagnosed with a mental illness that would
have impacted the nature of discharge.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 3 Jul
79.
On 30 Apr 82, the applicant was notified by his commander of his
intent to recommend his discharge for Unsuitability under the
provisions of AFM 39-12, Separation for Unsuitability,
Misconduct, Resignation, or Request for Discharge for the Good
of the Service and Procedures for the Rehabilitation Program.
The reasons for the action included destruction of government
property, assault, drunk and disorderly conduct, alcohol abuse,
failure to obey lawful orders; all in violation of various
articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); for
which he received letters of counseling, letters of reprimand
and non-judicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of
Article 15 of the UCMJ.
On 11 May 82, the applicant declined to submit statements. The
evaluation officer concurred with the commanders recommended
action.
On 19 May 82, the case was found to be legally sufficient and
the discharge authority approved the commanders recommendation
and directed the applicants administrative discharge.
On 28 May 82, the applicant was furnished a General (Under
Honorable Conditions) discharge, and was credited with 2 years,
10 months, and 26 days of active service.
A request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant
on 28 Apr 14 for review and comment within 30 days. 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 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
applicants post-service activities, there is no way for us to
determine if the applicants accomplishments since leaving the
service are sufficiently meritorious to overcome the misconduct
for which he was discharged. 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-2014-01179 in Executive Session on 21 Nov 14 under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 Mar 14.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Information Bulletin - Clemency.
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 | CY2014 | BC 2014 01753
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01753 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 discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient for us to conclude that the applicants post-service activities overcome the misconduct for...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03250
On 23 May 83, the discharge authority directed the applicant be discharged with an UOTHC discharge. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, in the absence of any evidence related to the applicants post-service activities, there is no way for us to determine if the applicants accomplishments since leaving the service warrant such an action. Available Applicant's Master Personnel Records Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Sep 14, w/atch.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00074
________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The Air Force provided discipline without counseling. The applicants complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-00074 in Executive Session on 7 Sep 11, under...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01637
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01637 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to Honorable. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03103
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-03103 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NOT INDICATED HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His characterization of service be upgraded from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. We considered...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02035
On 5 Aug 83, the applicant was furnished a general discharge, and was credited with 1 year, 6 months, and 14 days of active service. On 3 Aug 85, the applicant applied to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to have his discharge upgraded to honorable. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Aug 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00997
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00997 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded to Honorable. 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. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02897
For this offense she was reduced to the grade of airman (E-2) (suspended until 1 Aug 82), forfeiture of $50 per month for two months, and 30 days extra duty. On 10 Apr 86, the applicant appeared before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) with counsel. The Board denied the applicants request to upgrade her discharge and concluded that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, was within the discretion of the discharge authority...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00779
The Board should find it in the interest of justice to consider his untimely application because he wanted his record corrected since his discharge and is thankful to have the opportunity. On 17 Jun 82, the Air Force Court for Military Review found the approved findings and sentence were correct in law and fact. The requested relief cannot be done administratively given the application was received more than three (3) years since he was court-martialed and discharged.