RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-03264 

INDEX CODE: 110.02 

COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

Due to his lack of understanding and legal advice regarding his 
military rights, he was given an administrative discharge over 
some racial problems he was experiencing at Barksdale Air Force 
Base, Louisiana. Had he known his rights, he believes everything 
would have been worked-out taking into consideration his three 
years of good conduct, training, and hard work. 

 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of an 
excerpt from Wikipedia Encyclopedia concerning military 
discharges. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 5 March 1997, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force 
at the age of 20 in the grade of airman basic (E-1). He was 
subsequently promoted to the grade of airman first class (E-3) 
effective and with a date of rank of 5 July 1998. Subsequent to 
his completion of basic training, he entered training to become a 
security forces journeyman. 

 

Between October 1997 and February 2000, the applicant received 
one Article 15, eleven Letters of Reprimand (LORs), two Letters 
of Counseling (LOCs), and one referral enlisted performance 
report (EPR). His pattern of misconduct resulted from his 
failure to remove bottles of propane from his room, failure to 
properly account for his equipment on two separate occasions, 
reporting late for duty, failure to have his room in inspection 
order on two separate occasions, failure to annotate the sign-up 
list for meals, failure to wear his hat in accordance with (IAW) 
Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2903, disobeying the instruction 
of a noncommissioned officer (NCO), operating unserviceable 



equipment, failure to attend scheduled appointments, failure to 
initial next to his scheduled appointment after being told to do 
so by an NCO, failure to follow procedures in weapons handling 
IAW AFI 31-207, and failure to maintain his uniform IAW AFI 36-
2903. His Article 15 punishment consisted of a reprimand and 
reduction in grade to airman (E-2) with a new date of rank of 
20 March 2000. 

 

On 8 May 2000, his commander notified the applicant of his intent 
to recommend the applicant for discharge for a pattern of 
misconduct under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.50.2, 
and for a general (under honorable conditions) discharge without 
probation or rehabilitation (P&R). After consulting counsel, the 
applicant provided a statement in his own behalf. After 
considering the applicant’s submission, his commander proceeded 
with the recommendation to discharge the applicant. On 12 May 
2000, the staff judge advocate found the case to be legally 
sufficient. The discharge authority approved the recommendation 
and directed the applicant be discharged with a general (under 
honorable conditions) discharge without P&R. 

 

On 17 May 2000, the applicant was discharged with a general 
(under honorable conditions) characterization of service for a 
pattern of misconduct. He served 3 years, 2 months, and 13 days 
on active duty. 

 

On 25 May 2001, the Air Force Discharge Review Board considered 
and denied the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOS recommends denying the applicant’s request to upgrade 
his discharge. DPSOS states the applicant’s discharge was 
consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of 
the discharge regulation in effect at that time and was within 
the discretion of the discharge authority. The applicant did not 
submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that 
occurred in the discharge processing. The applicant has provided 
no facts warranting an upgrade to his discharge characterization. 

 

The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant 
on 9 January 2009 for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit 
D). As of this date, this office has received no response. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 



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 an injustice. We took 
notice of the applicant's 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 that the 
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. 
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no 
compelling basis 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 this application in 
Executive Session on 24 March 2009, under the provisions of AFI 
36-2603: 

 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection 
with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2008-03264: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 17 Sep 08, w/atch. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 25 Nov 08. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Jan 09.