RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03168 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He did nothing wrong. He was just there. He has a good record 
except for this one incident. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who 
entered active duty on 7 July 1976. He was progressively 
promoted to the grade of senior airman (E-4). 

 

The applicant received three Letters of Counseling between 9 May 
1977 and 23 November 1977, for not being available for Bay 
Orderly duties, failing to sign out some technical orders, and 
not following prescribed procedures in conducting an inspection. 

 

On 11 January 1980, he was tried and found guilty by the 96th 
District Court for the County of Marquette, Michigan, for the 
malicious destruction of personal property and larceny when he 
broke into some fishing shacks located at Johnson Lake, Michigan, 
vandalizing them to some extent and stealing some of the 
contents. As a result, he received one year suspended sentence 
and a fine of $200. 

 

On 5 February 1980, the applicant was notified of his commander’s 
intent to recommend him for discharge for misconduct, to wit: a 
civil court conviction. The applicant acknowledged receipt of 
his commander’s intent, consulted counsel, and waived his right 
to an administrative discharge board with the condition that he 
receive a general discharge. 

 


On 19 February 1980, the group commander recommended the 
applicant’s conditional waiver for a general discharge be 
accepted based on his military record as a whole. 

 

The case was found legally sufficient and the discharge authority 
approved the recommended discharge and directed the applicant be 
discharged under the provisions of Air Force Manual 39-12, 
Chapter 2, Section C, paragraph 2-23, without probation or 
rehabilitation, and that he be issued a general discharge 
certificate. 

 

The applicant was discharged from active duty in the grade of 
senior airman effective 19 March 1980 with a general (under 
honorable conditions) discharge. His narrative reason for 
separation reflects “Misconduct – Civil Court Disposition – Board 
Waiver.” He served 3 years, 8 months, and 13 days on active 
duty. 

 

On 25 January 2013, the applicant was given an opportunity to 
submit comments about his post service activities (Exhibit C). 
In response, the applicant provided an electronic communication 
indicting his accomplishments since his discharge. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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. In the interest of 
justice, 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 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 


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-2012-03168 in Executive Session on 25 April 2013, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2012-03168 was considered: 

 

Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 Jun 12, w/atch. 

Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 25 Jan 13, w/atch. 

Exhibit D. E-Mail, Applicant, dated 8 Feb 13. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair