Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02118
Original file (BC 2014 02118.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02118

			COUNSEL:  NONE

			HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded 
to Honorable.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

While assigned to her first duty station, she was verbally and 
psychologically abused as well as publicly humiliated on a daily 
basis.  As a low-ranking enlisted member, she was left with no 
options to correct or rectify the problem other than to remove 
herself from the situation.  She requested an early separation 
on more than one occasion; which was denied.  The only options 
she could come up were to go Absent Without Leave (AWOL), commit 
suicide, or drink.  She chose the latter; which seemed to be the 
least of the three evils.  

In support of her request, the applicant provided a letter of 
explanation, dated 5 May 14, a copy of her DD Form 214, 
Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, two AF 
Form 31s, Airman’s Request for Early Separation/Separation Based 
on Change in Service Obligation, a copy of a Letter of Reprimand 
(LOR), dated 23 Feb 95, a copy of an AF Form 1058, Unfavorable 
Information File (UIF) Action, dated 2 Mar 95, a copy of a 
Response to her LOR, UIF/Control Roster Action, dated 28 Feb 95, 
five Character Reference Letters, an Abstract of the Narrative 
Summary of the Applicant’s Alcoholism Rehabilitation, dated 3 
Oct 95, a copy of a Certified Missouri Peer Specialist 
Certificate, dated 9 Jan 14, a copy of a Training Specialist 
Certificate, dated 16 Sep 04, and a copy of Southern Illinois 
University Carbondale Transcripts, 

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 30 Jul 
93.

On 31 Jul 95, the applicant accepted an Article 15, Nonjudicial 
Punishment, for failing to obey a lawful order, a violation of 
Article 92, of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  She 
was reduced in grade to airman (suspended) and given 14 days 
extra duty.

On 25 Oct 95, the applicant’s was found derelict in her 
performance for failing to refrain from drinking and her 
suspended reduction in grade was vacated. 

On 31 Oct 95, the applicant was notified by her commander, she 
was being recommended for discharge for Minor Disciplinary 
Infractions pursuant to AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation 
of Airmen, Chapter 5, Section H, paragraph 5.49. 

On 2 Nov 95, the applicant consulted legal counsel and submitted 
a statement on her behalf requesting an Honorable discharge.

On 7 Nov 95, the Staff Judge Advocate found the discharge 
package legally sufficient and recommended a General (Under 
Honorable Conditions) discharge.

On 13 Nov 95, the discharge authority approved a General (Under 
Honorable Conditions) discharge without probation and 
rehabilitation.

On 17 Nov 95, the applicant was furnished a General (Under 
Honorable Conditions) discharge, and was credited with 2 years, 
3 months, and 18 days of active service.   

A request for post-service information was forwarded to the 
applicant on 1 Jul 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 
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 she 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-2014-02118 in Executive Session on 28 Apr 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-02118 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Jun 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Clemency Information Bulletin.

						






Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9801358

    Original file (9801358.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-01358 (Case 2) INDEX CODE: 126.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: A Letter of Reprimand (LOR), dated 14 Oct 97, and an Unfavorable Information File (UIF), dated Nov 97, be removed from her permanent records. The applicant provided copies of the 14 Oct 97 LOR, issued by her flight commander,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 0000208

    Original file (0000208.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-00208 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her nonselection for reenlistment and the Unfavorable Information(UIF)/Control Roster actions be rescinded; she be promoted, with all back pay; and she be awarded the Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM. DPPAE indicated that a review of the applicant's military personnel records revealed she was nonselected for...

  • AF | DRB | CY2011 | FD-2009-00396

    Original file (FD-2009-00396.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) but declined and requests that the review be completed based on the available service record. The DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant’s discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct. 1 APPLICANT DATA (The person whose discharge is to be reviewed).

  • AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0222

    Original file (FD2002-0222.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD02-0222 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. Attachment: Examiner's Brief FD2002-0222 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD —y (Former AMN) (HGH SRA) as 1. The Respondent departed the local area failing to obtain a leave number and notify the squadron leadership of her whereabouts, failed to go to her appointed place of duty on four occasions, and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 05166

    Original file (BC 2012 05166.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 9 Jan 12, after considering the applicant’s 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 applicant’s EPR, rendered for the period 21 Dec 11 thru 20 Dec 12, was referred to him for a rating of “Does...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05230

    Original file (BC 2013 05230.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 31 Aug 10, she was honorably discharged with a narrative reason for separation of “Completion of Required Active Service” and Reentry (RE) code 3A which denotes “1st term airman separating before 36 months.” She served 1 year, 10 months and 17 days on active duty. The applicant did not provide any evidence of an error or injustice to warrant the requested change to her narrative reason for separation. Based on documents that are on file in her records, the discharge to include the...

  • AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD01-00032

    Original file (FD01-00032.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD01-00032 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable, change the Reason for discharge and change the RE Code. ISSUES: The applicant was discharged with a General Discharge for Misconduct — Minor Disciplinary Infractions. Attachment: Examiner's Brief FD-01-00032 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD (Former A1C) 1.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00849

    Original file (BC-2003-00849.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Maj M added she encouraged the enlisted member with the ROTC package because “then she would be out of the military and what she did then [was] her business.” On 11 Sep 01, the squadron commander (Maj S) recommended to the wing commander that the applicant be involuntarily discharged for serious and recurring misconduct punishable by military authorities, specifically, his knowing and willing engagement in an ongoing unprofessional relationship with a female enlisted member of his squadron...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04792

    Original file (BC 2013 04792.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    She had an Unfavorable Information File (UIF), a referral Enlisted Performance Report (EPR), a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for failure to follow a direct order and several Letters of Counseling (LOC) for her work performance. The applicant does not provide any proof of an error or injustice in reference to her RE code. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00763

    Original file (BC-2008-00763.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    She was under investigation from on/about 20 Dec 05 to 20 Jan 06. In addition, it is the commander’s responsibility to determine promotion testing eligibility. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 May 08.