RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03910
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His General Under Honorable Conditions (GUHC) discharge be
upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was wrongfully abused and discharged by a Lieutenant looking
to make a name for himself, so he accepted the discharge with
the understanding it would be changed to honorable within six
months.
The Board should find it in the interest of justice to consider
his untimely application because the reason he waited so long to
submit his application is because he was ashamed. It is only
now that he has begun to accept that being a veteran is a good
thing.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 13 Nov 75, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force.
On 17 Mar 77, he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for
failing to maintain satisfactory progress on the weight control
program for the month of February.
On 5 May 77, he received an LOR for failing to lose three pounds
per month while on the weight management program.
On 19 Jul 77, he acknowledged being placed on the control roster
for 90 days for disregard of the mandatory weight reduction
program.
On 29 Jul 77, he received an Article 15, Uniform Code of
Military Justice (UCMJ) for failing to go to his appointed place
of duty on or about 22, 23, 24 and 25 Jul 77. He did not submit
a written statement.
On 4 Aug 77, he received an Article 15, UCMJ and was reduced in
rank to the grade of Airman (E-2) and ordered to forfeit $50.00
for one month, suspended until 2 Feb 78, unless sooner vacated.
He did not appeal.
On 8 Sep 77, he received an Article 15, UCMJ for being Absent
Without Official Leave (AWOL) on or about 16 Aug 77. Because of
his misconduct for the period 16 Aug 77 to 1 Sep 77, his
commander vacated the suspension. He acknowledged receipt the
same day.
On 9 Sep 77, he was reduced in rank to Airman Basic (AB/E-1) and
acknowledged receipt on 12 Sep 77.
On 12 Sep 77, his commander notified him he was initiating
discharge action against him under the provisions of AFM 39-12,
Separation for Unsuitability, Misconduct, Resignation or Request
for Discharge for the Good of the Service, chapter 2, section A,
paragraph 2-4c. He acknowledged receipt the same day.
On 4 Oct 77, the applicant received a general under honorable
conditions discharge. He was credited with 1 year, 10 months
and 5 days of active service.
On 30 Sep 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.
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 applicants 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.
While we acknowledge the applicants request to upgrade his
general under honorable conditions discharge, we do not believe
he has demonstrated evidence of an injustice, as compared to
others in his similar situation. Therefore, in the absence of
evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting
the requested relief.
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 documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2014-03910 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 8 Sep 14.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Sep 14.AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03988
On 11 Dec 85, the applicant received an honorable discharge. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. While we acknowledge the applicants request to have her Staff Sergeant rank reinstated due to current weight management program standards, this board notes that standards in effect during the applicants service were the standards to be adhered to by all Air Force service members at that time.
AF | DRB | CY2006 | FD2005-00331
The DRB noted that when the applicant applied for these benefits, he signed a statement (DD Form 2366) that he understood he must receive an Honorable discharge to rcceive future educational entitlements. S E W I C E UNDER REVIEW: a. Enlisted as A1C 28 Oct 98 for 6 yrs. (Change Discharge to Honorable) Issue 1: To receive MGI Bill benefits, I served the USAF honorably and was discharged for weight management.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-00882
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-00882 INDEX CODE: 126.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Article 15 be set aside so that her discharge can be upgraded so that she may qualify for Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) benefits. The service member may then consult with a defense counsel to determine whether to accept nonjudicial...
The discharge complied with directives in effect at the time and records indicate his military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and indicated that, while in the Air Force, he had frequent problems with the people who shared his barracks. DOUGLAS...
On or about 22 Nov 85, he failed to progress satisfactorily in the Air Force WMP by gaining 10 pounds instead of losing the 5 pounds required. On 30 Jan 89, the commander, Air Refueling Wing, , received the proposed demotion case against the applicant and agreed with the applicant’s commander that demotion action was appropriate, effective 30 Jan 89. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed this application...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03009
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03009 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable. We took notice of the applicants 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 (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the...
--He received a letter of counseling on 10 Jan 77 for not reporting for duty. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his UOTHC discharge should be upgraded to honorable or general. We note the applicant received three Article 15s, several LORs and counseling sessions, and substance abuse rehabilitation to no avail.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00848
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00848 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be changed to a medical discharge. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show his character of service as Honorable and his narrative reason for separation as...
Applicant submitted a written statement to the discharge authority along with two letters of support. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPAES reviewed applicant's request and states that the RE code is correct (see Exhibit C). _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant's response to the Air Force advisories states that DPPRS was incorrect in stating that...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03898
On 22 Sep 86, the discharge authority directed the applicant be discharged and furnished a General discharge. On 7 Oct 86, the applicant was furnished a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge, with a Narrative Reason for Separation of Exceeding Air Force Weight Standards, and was credited with 2 years, 5 months, and 12 days of active service. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 3 Jun 14.