RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02955 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

She was young, immature and lacked the maturity to follow the 
rules and requirements while in technical school. She is now 
mature, responsible and wishes to serve her country before she is 
disqualified due to age. She would like the opportunity to right 
the wrong. Her pattern of misconduct while inexcusable, was 
minor in nature and she wishes to make amends. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 8 September 1987, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air 
Force. 

 

On 6 May 1988, the applicant was notified by her commander that 
he was recommending she be discharged from the Air Force under 
the provisions of AFR 39-10, Administration Separation of Airmen, 
for a pattern of misconduct. The specific reasons for this action 
were she received three Article 15 actions for wrongfully 
permitting a member of the opposite sex to be in her dormitory 
room, failing to report for duty for an entire day, and operating 
a vehicle without proper registration, not having a valid 
driver’s license and no proof of insurance. 

 

The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of 
discharge, received advice from a military defense attorney, and 
waived her right to submit statements in her own behalf. On 
6 May 1988, the discharge authority determined that a general 
discharge was appropriate in light of the applicant’s overall 
military record. 

 

On 13 May 1988, the applicant was discharged with a general 
discharge after completing a period of 8 month and 6 days total 
active service. 


Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation (FBI), Clarksburg, WV, provided a copy of an 
Investigation Report (Exhibit C). 

 

On 9 December 2010, the FBI investigation and a request for post-
service information were forwarded to the applicant for response 
within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received 
by this office (Exhibit D). 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 applicant's complete submission in judging the 
merits of the case; however, 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 conclude, therefore, that the 
discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the 
discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances. We 
considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we 
do not find the evidence presented is sufficient 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-2010-02955 in Executive Session on 1 June 2011, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 22 Jul 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. FBI Response, dated 20 Sep 10.