RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01042 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to 
honorable. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He was young and immature. His wife left him and he turned to 
alcohol and made some very bad choices. Since his discharge, he 
has turned his life around and is now a Fire Fighter. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his 
DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge from the 
Armed Forces of the United States. 

 

Applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at 
Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 20 Jul 87, the applicant contracted his enlistment in the 
Regular Air Force. He was promoted to airman first class 
effective with a date of rank of 1 Sep 87. He was demoted to 
airman basic on 2 Sep 88. He served as a security specialist. 

 

On 22 Sep 88, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was 
recommending his discharge from the Air Force for misconduct. 
The specific reasons for the discharge action were: 

 

a. On 14 Apr 88, he received a Letter of Counseling (LOC) 
for failing to complete his Career Development Course (CDC) and a 
mobility form. 

 

b. On 21 Jul 88, he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) 
and a Unfavorable Information File (UIF) entry for failing a 
scheduled dormitory inspection. 

 

 c. On 23 Aug 88, he received an LOR and UIF entry for 
driving with an expired driver’s license. 

 


d. On 2 Sep 88, he received an Article 15 for uttering a 
check and stealing a box of checks. 

 

His commander advised him of his rights in this matter. 

 

On 26 Sep 88, he acknowledged receipt of the notification letter 
and, after consulting with legal counsel waived his right to 
submit a statement in his own behalf. 

 

On 28 Sep 88, a legal review was conducted and the staff judge 
advocate found the case legally sufficient to support separation 
and recommended a general discharge without probation and 
rehabilitation. 

 

On 5 Oct 88, the discharge authority directed a general 
discharge. 

 

The applicant was discharged on 11 Oct 88. He served 1 year, 
2 months and 22 days of active service. 

 

On 30 Sep 10, the Board staff requested the applicant provide 
documentation concerning his activities since leaving military 
service (Exhibit D). 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 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. We considered 
upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not 
find the evidence presented is sufficient to compel us to 
recommend granting the relief sought on that basis. Therefore, 


in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon 
which to recommend granting the relief sought in this 
application. 

 

______________________________________________________________ 

 

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 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-2010-01042 in Executive Session on 4 Nov 10, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Mar 10, w/atch. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 30 Sep 10, w/atch.