RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01495
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded
to Honorable.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
While assigned to Whitman Air Force Base the applicant was in a
horrible environment. The pressure of the surrounding area and
its racist environment contributed to his attitude.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 16 Sep
86.
On 31 May 87, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand for
being 90 days delinquent on his NCO Club Bill.
On 11 Jul 87, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand for
removing food without annotating the Launch Control Facility
log.
On 3 Sep 87, the applicant received an Article 15, Nonjudicial
Punishment, for wrongfully appropriating food items from the
Launch Control Facility. He received 30 days of Correctional
Custody.
On 19 Sep 87, the applicant received a Letter of Counseling for
being late to guard mount.
On 30 Mar 88, the applicant received a Letter for Reprimand for
a civilian conviction of shoplifting at an off-base
establishment.
On 4 May 88, the applicant was notified by his commander of his
intent to recommend discharge for conduct prejudicial to good
order and discipline in accordance with AFR 39-10, Separation
Upon Expiration of Term of Service, for Convenience of
Government, Minority, Dependency and Hardship, Chapter 5,
Section H, paragraph 5-47b. The commander recommended the
applicants service be characterized as General. The applicant
consulted counsel and waived his right to submit statements on
his behalf.
On 12 May 88, the Base Staff Judge Advocate concluded the record
contained sufficient evidence and found no errors or
irregularities in the case.
On 17 May 88, the discharge authority approved the discharge
with a characterization of General (Under Honorable Conditions).
Probation and rehabilitation were considered; however,
suspension of the approved discharge was not deemed appropriate.
On 19 May 88, the applicant was furnished a General (Under
Honorable Conditions) discharge, and was credited with 1 year, 8
months, and 4 days of active service.
On 31 Jul 89, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB)
considered and denied a similar request. The AFDRB concluded
the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive
requirement of the discharge regulations, was within the
discretion of the discharge authority and the applicant was
provided full administrative due process.
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 application was not filed within three years after the
alleged error or injustice was discovered, or could have been
discovered, as required by Section 1552, Title 10, United States
Code (10 USC 1552), and Air Force Instruction 36-2603. Although
the applicant asserts a date of discovery which would, if
correct, make the application timely, the essential facts which
gave rise to the application were known to applicant long before
the asserted date of discovery. Knowledge of those facts
constituted the date of discovery and the beginning of the
three-year period for filing. Thus, the application is
untimely.
2. Paragraph b of 10 USC 1552 permits us, in our discretion, to
excuse untimely filing in the interest of justice. We have
carefully reviewed applicant's submission and the entire record,
and we do not find a sufficient basis to excuse the untimely
filing of this application. The applicant has not shown a
plausible reason for delay in filing, and we are not persuaded
that the record raises issues of error or injustice that require
resolution on the merits at this time. Accordingly, we conclude
that it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the
untimely filing of the application.
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the
interest of justice to waive the untimeliness. It is the
decision of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as
untimely.
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2014-01495 in Executive Session on 16 Dec 14 under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Mar 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Apr 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03914
d. On 23 Jun 87, the applicant received a LOR for failing to go to his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on 6 different occasions. On 3 Dec 90, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied the applicants request to upgrade his general discharge to an honorable discharge and to change the narrative reason for separation, indicating the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulations and was within the sound...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 01168
In support of his request, applicant provided a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. On 10 Sep 90, the applicant appeared before the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his general discharge be upgraded to honorable. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 8 May 09.
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01168
In support of his request, applicant provided a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. On 10 Sep 90, the applicant appeared before the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his general discharge be upgraded to honorable. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 8 May 09.
AF | DRB | CY2006 | FD2005-00444
Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance withlwithout counsel, and tlie right to submit an application to the AFBCMR Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request. SERVICE UNDER REVIEW: a. Enlisted as AB 22 Sep 87 for 4 yrs. (Change Discharge to Honorable) Issue 1: I am requesting that my discharge be upgraded.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03499
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03499 INDEX CODE: 106.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 17 May 08 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 1988 general discharge be upgraded to honorable. The recommendation was approved on 7 Dec 88.] Although the applicant did not specifically request consideration based on clemency, we...
In the applicant’s response to the Air Force evaluations, he requests that the AFBCMR direct his record be corrected to reflect selection for promotion to the grade of Reserve major and lieutenant colonel with reinstatement to active duty. He is currently serving in the grade of lieutenant colonel as a non-extended active duty (non-EAD) reserve officer. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-00272
In the applicant’s response to the Air Force evaluations, he requests that the AFBCMR direct his record be corrected to reflect selection for promotion to the grade of Reserve major and lieutenant colonel with reinstatement to active duty. He is currently serving in the grade of lieutenant colonel as a non-extended active duty (non-EAD) reserve officer. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01212
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01212 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. On 11 Jan 01, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered applicant's request for upgrade of his discharge to honorable and to change his reason for discharge. The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit...
a [ 4 a b Q o His Officer Effectiveness Report (OER) , rendered for the period 26 Sep 85 through 25 Sep 86, be declared void or void the ratings and comments of the indorser. The other statements the applicant provides support his appeal, but they are not from rating chain members, nor do they prove the contested report is inaccurate. Hammond Myers, 111, Panel Chairman Scott W. Stucky, Member Joseph T. Wagner, Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02827
On 5 Mar 92, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request to have his UOTHC discharge upgraded to honorable. Based on the documentation from the previous review by the AFDRB and the limited documentation on file in the master personnel record, they found the discharge consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. The Board noted the applicant’s prior honorable periods of service and his accomplishments...