RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-03196
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to
honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He did nothing wrong other than come to the realization that God created
him a homosexual and he could not share that. If he did something wrong,
it was when he told his doctor.
In support of his request, he submits a character reference letter and
other documentation.
Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 30 October 1964 in the grade
of airman basic for a period of 4 years.
On 16 February 1966, applicant was notified of his commander's intent to
initiate discharge action against him because there was reason to believe
that applicant was a class II homosexual. The commander recommended an
under honorable conditions (general) discharge.
The commander advised him that he had a right to consult legal counsel, the
right to present his case before an administrative discharge board, to
submit statements in his own behalf or to waive his rights to an
administrative discharge board.
On 24 September 1962, applicant consulted counsel, waived his right to a
Board hearing, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf.
The discharge authority approved an undesirable discharge.
Applicant was discharged on 7 March 1966, in the grade of A3C with a UOTHC
discharge, under the provisions of AFR 39-17 (Unfitness). He completed 1
year, 4 months and 8 days of total active military service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Military Personnel Management Specialist, Separations Branch, HQ
AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed this application and states that under current
Department of Defense and Air Force guidelines, the member would have
received a discharge characterization of honorable or under honorable
conditions (general) since his records do not indicate he attempted,
solicited, or committed a homosexual act by using force, coercion, or
intimidation. Therefore, in view of the applicant’s otherwise satisfactory
service record, they recommend AFBCMR direct his military records be
changed to indicate an upgrade of his discharge to under honorable
conditions (general). He has not filed a timely request.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 9 February 2001, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant for review and response within thirty (30) days. As of this
date, no response has been received by this office.
_________________________________________________________________
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. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of probable error or injustice. After thoroughly reviewing the
evidence of record, we find no impropriety in the characterization of the
applicant’s discharge at the time of his separation. However, the Board
majority finds that the applicant’s sexual orientation appears to have been
established as early as 11 to 12 years of age. It appears he had numerous
homosexual encounters prior to his enlistment in 1964 and clearly did not
meet the standards for induction. Moreover, it appears that the actions of
the applicant occurred off-base, between consenting adults and there were
no aggravating factors. Thus, the majority of the Board believes that had
the applicant been discharged today, he most likely would have received an
honorable discharge. In view of this and since he has lived with the
stigma of an undesirable discharge for over 35 years with all its negative
impact upon gainful employment, the Board majority recommends that he
receive an honorable discharge as a matter of clemency.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating
to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 7 March 1966, he was honorably
discharged and issued an Honorable Discharge Certificate.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive
Session on 19 April 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Teddy L. Houston, Panel Chair
Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Member
Ms. Barbara J. White-Olson, Member
The majority of the Board voted, to correct the records, as recommended.
Ms. White-Olson voted to deny the application, but does not desire to
submit a minority report. The following documentary evidence was
considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 Dec 00, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 19 Jan 01.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 9 Feb 01.
TEDDY L. HOUSTON
Panel Chair
AFBCMR 00-03196
MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF
Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force
Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section
1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to , be corrected to show that on 7 March 1966, he was honorably
discharged and issued an Honorable Discharge Certificate.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-03022 INDEX NUMBER: 112.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment (RE) code of “2C” (Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service) be upgraded to a code in the three (3) series to allow...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response, within 30 days (Exhibit D). The facts and opinions stated in the advisory opinion appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant.
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Military Personnel Management Specialist, HQ AFPC/DPPRS reviewed this application and recommended denial. _________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: A majority of the Board finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommend the application be denied. A majority found that applicant had not provided substantial evidence of error...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). The facts and opinions stated in the advisory opinions appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant.
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). The facts and opinions stated in the advisory opinions appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01235
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS reviewed the applicant’s case file and submits no recommendation. The DPPRS 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 27 may 2005, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). Accordingly, the Board majority recommends his...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). The facts and opinions stated in the advisory opinion appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response, within 30 days (Exhibit D). The applicant’s response to the advisory opinion is at Exhibit E. After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action.
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Separations Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRS stated that, on 15 May 80, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force in the grade of airman (E- 2) under the provisions of AFM 39-12 (Request for Discharge for the Good of the Service) and received an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Her commander recommended she be given an under other than honorable conditions discharge and, on 12 May 80, the...