RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02059 

 INDEX CODE: 110.02 

 COUNSEL: 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be 
upgraded to an honorable or general (under honorable conditions) 
discharge. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He served honorably for ten years and does not believe the 
punishment fits the crime. At the time, he was going through a 
divorce and he had various personal issues. 

 

He recognizes he acted inappropriately between September and 
October 1986. He requests the conditions of his discharge be 
reviewed and changed to an honorable discharge by taking into 
consideration that he served honorably for over ten years. 

 

He has been a model citizen since his discharge and has a son 
currently serving in the military. He believes he has been a 
positive influence on him by encouraging him to join the 
military. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of a 
listing of his military accomplishments, extracts of his 
personnel records, character reference letters, and statements 
from his counsel. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant entered the Regular Air Force on 16 Jun 82 and 
served for a period of 4 years, 5 months, and 2 days. He was 
credited with 5 years, 10 months, and 13 days of prior active 
service. 

 

Records reveal the applicant was notified of pending discharge 
action on 29 Oct 86. Specifically, the commander cited minor 
disciplinary infractions as the basis for discharge. 


 

The applicant’s misconduct included three Article 15s, Record of 
Nonjudicial Punishment, for violation of restriction and 
disobeying a lawful order, absent without leave (AWOL), and 
failure to go; vacation of his noncommissioned (NCO) officer 
status; a memorandum for record for a bad check, two 60-day 
delinquent account notices (NCO Open Mess and Rod and Gun Club); 
dishonored check notices and a dishonored check; a Letter of 
Counseling; and suspension of his check cashing privileges. 

 

The applicant waived his rights to a hearing before an 
administrative discharge board and to submit statements in his 
own behalf. Further, he acknowledged that fact that he could 
receive a UOTHC discharge. 

 

On 4 Nov 86, the staff judge advocate found the case legally 
sufficient. On 7 Nov 06, the discharge authority directed 
discharge. 

 

On 17 Nov 86, the applicant was discharged with an under other 
than honorable conditions discharge and a narrative reason for 
separation of misconduct-pattern of minor disciplinary 
infractions. 

 

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, states they were 
unable to identify an arrest record on the basis of the 
information furnished. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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. The Board majority finds insufficient relevant evidence has 
been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or 
injustice. Although the applicant contends he has been a model 
citizen since discharge, the Board majority notes he has failed 
to provide sufficient post-service information since discharge. 
Further, the Board majority notes the applicant has not 
identified an error or injustice in his discharge processing. 
Therefore, in view of the above, and in the absence of evidence 
to the contrary, the Board majority finds no 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 Docket Number 
BC-2009-02059 in Executive Session on 12 August 2010, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 

 

By a majority vote, the Board voted to deny the applicant’s 
request. voted to grant the applicant’s request but did not 
desire to submit a minority report. The following documentary 
evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Apr 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.