RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01841 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be 
upgraded to honorable. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He was discharged because his bank account was overdrawn for a 
small amount of $20. He does not feel this was justification 
for discharge. 

 

He is not applying for benefits, but rather to feel better about 
himself and the time served in the Air Force. 

 

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

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant entered the Regular Air Force on 12 Oct 59. 

 

Available records reflect the applicant was notified of pending 
discharge action on 2 Mar 62. Specifically, the commander cited 
frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military 
authorities and an established pattern of dishonorably failing 
to pay just debts as the bases for discharge. 

 

The applicant consulted counsel, waived his rights to a board 
hearing and to submit statements in his own behalf. 

 

The applicant’s misconduct included a Special Court Martial, for 
wrongful appropriation of government equipment, an Article 15, Record of Nonjudicial Punishment, for disobeying a lawful order, 
driving with an expired base registration, speeding, multiple 
instances of failing to pay debts, and appearance and attitude 
infractions. 


The staff judge advocate found the discharge legally sufficient, 
and on 14 Mar 63, the discharge authority directed discharge. 

 

The applicant was discharged with a UOTHC discharge on 4 Apr 62. 

 

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of 
Investigations (FBI), states they were unable to identify an 
arrest record on the basis of the information furnished. A 
request for post-service information was forwarded to the 
applicant on 8 Sep 10 for a response within 30 days (Exhibit C). 
As of this date, not response has been received. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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-2010-01841 in Executive Session on 23 November 2010, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 Apr 10, w/atch. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 8 Sep 10. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair