RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03302 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

The applicant provides no contentions for his request other than 
he became a United States citizen on 15 June 1964 and his mother 
worked for the Presidio Food Service for 28 years. 

 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of his DD 
Form 214, Report of Separation from Active Duty, general 
discharge certificate, High School Diploma of Graduation, 
Certificate of Naturalization, and a San Francisco Police 
Department notification of incident memorandum. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who 
entered active duty on 10 August 1964 and was promoted to the 
grade of airman third class (E-2) with a date of rank of 
4 October 1964. 

 

Between September 1965 and August 1966, the applicant received 
three Article 15 punishments; twice for failing to obey a lawful 
order and once for being disorderly in station. His punishments 
consisted of reduction in grade to airman basic (E-1), 
correctional custody for 30 days, and forfeiture of $46 per month 
for two months. In addition, he received a Letter of Reprimand 
for conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline and was 
placed on the control roster for showing irresponsibility in 
conduct. As a result, he received a referral performance report 
for the period 10 August 1965 through 6 April 1966. 

 

On 11 April 1966, the applicant was notified of his commander’s 
intent to recommend he be discharged for frequent involvement of 


a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. The 
applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification and elected to 
waive his right to a hearing before a board of officers and his 
right to submit a statement in his own behalf. On 11 May 1966, 
the discharge authority approved the applicant’s discharge under 
the provisions of Air Force Regulation 39-17 with an undesirable 
discharge. On 16 May 1966, the applicant was discharged with an 
under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge. He 
served one year, nine months, and seven days on active duty. 

 

On 4 April 1978, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) 
reviewed and upgraded the applicant’s characterization of 
discharge to general (under honorable conditions). 

 

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

 

On 27 October 2010, the applicant was given an opportunity to 
submit comments about his post service activities and in response 
to the FBI Report (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 error or injustice. We note that on 
4 April 1978, the AFDRB upgraded the applicant’s UOTHC discharge 
to a general (under honorable conditions). After reviewing his 
recent submission, we find that a further upgrade is not 
warranted. The applicant has provided insufficient evidence to 
use as a basis to further upgrade his characterization of service 
based on the merits of the case or on clemency. The 
characterization of service previously upgraded by the AFDRB was 
not contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation, 
unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses committed. 
Therefore, based on the foregoing, we find 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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2010-03302 in Executive Session on 16 June 2011, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2010-03302 was considered: 

 

Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 7 Sep 10, w/atchs. 

Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

Exhibit C. FBI Report. 

Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 27 Oct 10, w/atch. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair