Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01968
Original file (BC 2014 01968.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01968

					COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His General (under honorable conditions) discharge be changed to 
Honorable.



APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

At the time of his discharge he was experiencing hardship and 
was forced to move to a relative’s home in Oklahoma.  He tried 
to set up a temporary transfer to the Oklahoma unit so that he 
could continue with his Unit Training Assembly (UTA).  After 
returning to his home unit and having missed several UTAs, he 
was informed of his discharge.  He was told that it would be 
under Honorable conditions for unsatisfactory participation.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Air National Guard on 5 Oct 
91.

On an illegible date, the applicant’s commander notified him of 
his intent to recommend his discharge for unsatisfactory 
participation in scheduled training.

On an illegible date in Jun 98, the applicant acknowledged 
receipt of the action and was afforded the opportunity to 
consult with legal counsel.

On 30 Dec 98, the applicant was furnished a general discharge, 
and was credited with 7 years, 2 months, and 26 days of active 
service.

On 4 Aug 14, a request for post-service information was 
forwarded to the applicant for review and response 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 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-2014-01968 in Executive Session on 29 Jan 15, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	



The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-01968 was considered:


	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 8 May 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Aug 14.

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01278

    Original file (BC 2014 01278.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFRC/A1K concurs with the recommendation from AFRC/RMG to deny the applicant’s request for pay and points for the period May – Jul 13. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. Exhibit D. Letter,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01614

    Original file (BC 2014 01614.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01614 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “6U” (Not selected for reentry by the commander) on his National Guard Bureau Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of Service, be upgraded so he may reenter the military. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01540

    Original file (BC 2014 01540.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01540 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be credited with a satisfactory year of Reserve service for the retention/retirement year 9 Jun 05 to 8 Jun 06. In order for a year to be satisfactory and, thus, creditable towards Reserve retirement, a member has to earn at least 50 points during the period. Had the applicant been allowed to participate in...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02446

    Original file (BC 2013 02446.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RESUME OF THE CASE: On 8 May 14, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s original request that the same corrections be made to his records. For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s original request and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings (ROP) at Exhibit I. On 9 Mar 14, the applicant submitted a request for reconsideration of his original application, reiterating the same argument that the ANG...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03670

    Original file (BC-2012-03670.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Members may be discharged when the member has accumulated nine or more unexcused absences from UTA within a 12-month period. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 26 November 2012, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit D). We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01426

    Original file (BC-2003-01426.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The commander recommended the applicant be discharged with a general, (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case and while we sympathize with his situation at the time and appreciate his efforts to care for his family, there was simply no evidence presented that justified granting the requested relief; subsequently, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air National Guard office of primary...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04134

    Original file (BC-2010-04134.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    AFI 36- 320, Paragraph 3.13.2.1.1, actually states “Member may be discharged when the member has accumulated nine or more unexcused absences from UTA within a 12-month period.” The documents provided indicate the applicant was given a three month leave of absence (LOA) in March of 1997 to attend to “personal business” and, was due to return to UTAs in July 1997. The AFI states a member may be discharged and does not state the member must be discharged. We took notice of the applicant's...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03333

    Original file (BC-2004-03333.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was called to ADT on 19 Apr 62, and was released from ADT on 16 Oct 62. In a 14 May 64 letter, the 90ATS reported the applicant failed to complete his ADT, serving only 32 days. On 16 Feb 65, the applicant was relieved from the Reserves and discharged under honorable conditions (general), effective 16 Feb 65.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03190

    Original file (BC 2014 03190.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03190 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded to Honorable. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was an excellent Airman and all Enlisted Performance Reports and Feedback Worksheets reflect that fact. The discharge authority approved the administrative discharge with a service characterization of General...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03346

    Original file (BC-2002-03346.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03346 INDEX CODE: 110.02, 100.06 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be changed to honorable and his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed from ineligible to eligible. On 16 July 2001, the applicant's commander notified him that he...