RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03090
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded
to honorable.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He thought his discharge would be automatically upgraded after
two years because that is what he was told. He has not been in
any legal trouble since his discharge 30 years ago.
The applicants complete submission, with attachment, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
According to the applicants DD Form 214, Certificate of Release
or Discharge from Active Duty, on 21 Oct 82, he enlisted in the
Regular Air Force.
On 30 Apr 85, the applicants commander notified him that he was
recommending his discharge from the Air Force for a pattern of
misconduct consisting of discreditable involvement with Military
Authorities. The specific reasons for the action were that:
a. On 7 Nov 83, he was formally counselled about a haircut
and disregard for authority.
b. On 29 Nov 83, he was formally counselled for failing to
go to his appointed place of duty.
c. On 24 Jan 84, he received non-judicial punishment (NJP)
for being disorderly on station.
d. In Apr 84, he received a vacation of suspended NJP
after having been arrested for driving while intoxicated.
e. In May 84, he was verbally reprimanded for writing a
dishonorable check.
f. On 10 Jan 85, he was formally counselled for visiting
his wife in the dormitory during non-visitation hours.
g. On 15 Mar 85, he was formally counselled about
financial management.
h. On 25 Mar 85, he received a Letter of Reprimand and
entered financial management class for writing a dishonorable
check.
i. On 9 Apr 85, he was formally counselled because his
dormitory room did not meet standards.
j. On 16 Apr 85, he received NJP for writing a
dishonorable check.
On 30 Apr 85, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the action,
and on 8 May 85, he consulted with legal counsel and submitted a
statement in his own behalf.
On 17 May 85, the case was reviewed and determined to be legally
sufficient.
On 21 May 85, the discharge authority directed the applicant be
discharged with a general discharge.
On 24 May 85, the applicant received a general discharge and was
credited with 2 years, 7 months, and 4 days of total active
service.
On 28 Aug 14, a request for post-service information was
forwarded to the applicant for review and comment 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 applicants post-service activities, there is no way for us
to determine if the applicants accomplishments since leaving
the service warrant such an action. 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-2014-03090 in Executive Session on 8 Apr 15, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 23 Jul 14, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Available Applicant's Master Personnel Records
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Aug 14, w/atch.
3
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00632
___________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 24 Jul 81, for a period of six years in the grade of airman basic. Applicant was discharged on 29 Nov 83, in the grade of airman basic, under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Misconduct-Pattern Discreditable Involvement with Military or Civil Authorities, and received an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. We find no evidence of error in this case...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01665
To date, no response to this request has been received. 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. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 10 Jul 09.
AF | DRB | CY2005 | FD2004-00479
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE CASE NUMBER FD-2004-00479 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable. On 4 October 1996, you received an Article 15 for writing bad checks to the 39th Comptroller Squadron and a fellow member of your squadron, being drunk and disorderly, communicating a threat, assault consummated by a battery, simple assault, and assault with a dangerous weapon likely to produce grievous bodily harm, which punishment consisted...
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant responded, indicating that nothing can change the facts or the past. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his general discharge should be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02629
The applicant provides a personnel statement and two supporting statements. The commander charged the applicant for not listing his 24 Feb 83 arrest for receiving a stolen credit card on his 30 Jul 84 Application for Enlistment. On 4 Dec 95, the Board denied the applicant’s request to have his narrative reason for discharge changed from “Fraudulent Enlistment” to “Administrative Disclosure.” A copy of the Record of Proceedings is provided at Exhibit B. Pursuant to the Board's request, the...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01991
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01991 INDEX CODE: 106.00, 100.05 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 24 Dec 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214 reflect an Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) of 81150 rather than 81130, and his 1985 discharge be upgraded from general to honorable. According to his Enlisted...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02807
Applicant was discharged from the Air Force on 7 Jun 85. He petitioned the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to upgrade his discharge to honorable in 1993. We find no evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we do not believe he has been the victim of an injustice.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01297
However, they did find based upon the record, applicant’s testimony, evidence provided by the applicant, that his reason for discharge was inequitable and directed his reason for separation be changed to “Misconduct – Pattern of Minor Disciplinary Infractions.” They further concluded that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and that the applicant was provided full...
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0343
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE CASE NUMBER FD02-0343 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. The DRB noted that when the applicant applied for these benefits, he signed a statement that he understood he must receive an Honorable discharge to receive future educational entitlements. You may also suspend the discharge and offer the respondent probation and rehabilitation under Chapter 7, AFI 36-3208, c, Forward the case file to the...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC 2007 03705
On 30 May 84, the applicant received an Article 15, Record of Nonjudicial Punishment, for filing a fraudulent travel claim. The applicant was discharged with a general discharge on 26 Jun 84. On 19 Feb 08, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for response within 30 days (Exhibit D).