Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02196
Original file (BC 2014 02196.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02196

			COUNSEL:  NONE

			HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was wrongfully accused of taking a day off when in fact he 
was granted a half-day off for completing a task early.  He 
contested the allegation, was demoted and given kitchen duties 
when in fact he was an important member of his commanding 
officer’s office.  He believes both his supervisor and her 
supervisor discriminated against him.

He has no other facts, other than he was stripped of an 
opportunity to make the military a career and serve to the 
fullest of his capabilities. 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 24 Jul 
84.

On 17 Jan 86, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand for 
failure to go.

On 27 Jan 87, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand for 
failing to return to his place of duty.

On 8 Jun 87, the applicant accepted an Article 15, Nonjudicial 
Punishment, for making a false official statement.  He was 
reduced in grade to airman (E-2) and ordered to forfeit $75 
dollars.

On 26 Jun 87, the applicant was notified by his commander that 
he was recommending his for discharge for minor disciplinary 
infractions in accordance with AFR 39-10, Separation Upon 
Expiration of Term of Service, for Convenience of Government, 
Minority, Dependency and Hardship, Chapter 5, paragraph 5-46.  
The commander recommended his service be characterized as 
General (Under Honorable Conditions).  

On 1 Jul 87, the Staff Judge Advocate completed a legal review 
and found the case legally sufficient.  On the same date, the 
discharge authority approved a General (Under Honorable 
Conditions) discharge without probation and rehabilitation.

On 2 Jul 87, the applicant was furnished a General (Under 
Honorable Conditions) discharge, and was credited with 2 years, 
11 months, and 9 days of active service.   

A request for post-service information was forwarded to the 
applicant on 22 Jan 15 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 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 a 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-2014-02196 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-2014-02196 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 May 14.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Jan 15.

						






Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03771

    Original file (BC-2005-03771.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    For this incident, he received a record of counseling. Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 22 Dec 05. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Dec 05.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-02491

    Original file (BC-2009-02491.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 13 Dec 85, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force for a period of six years. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00148

    Original file (BC 2013 00148.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00148 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. Therefore, we conclude that no basis exists for us to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03363

    Original file (BC-2002-03363.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The commander also recommended that the applicant receive a general discharge. On 30 Jun 87, the applicant’s squadron commander recommended to the Installation Commander that the applicant be discharged from the Air Force for unsatisfactory performance with a general discharge. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. __________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant indicated in his response to the Air Force evaluation...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01203

    Original file (BC-2005-01203.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005- 01203 INDEX CODE: 134.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 14 OCTOBER 2006 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The letter of reprimand (LOR) dated 23 Jul 04, be voided from his records. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01495

    Original file (BC 2014 01495.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 31 Jul 89, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied a similar request. 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. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Apr 14.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01811

    Original file (BC-2009-01811.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists to upgrade the applicant’s UOTHC discharge. The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application. The following...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01696

    Original file (BC 2014 01696 .txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01696 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On 28 Jan 14, the applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to have his discharge upgraded to Honorable. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00727

    Original file (BC 2014 00727.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00727 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 | CY2005 | BC-2005-00585

    Original file (BC-2005-00585.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005- 00585 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 21 AUGUST 2006 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The applicant offered a conditional waiver of the rights associated with an administrative discharge...