Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0101140
Original file (0101140.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  01-01140
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He desires his discharge upgraded.   He  indicates  that  he  was  not
equipped mentally or emotionally to adapt  to  military  life.   Since
that time he has turned his life around.  He is a productive member of
the community, speaks at prisons and rehabilitation centers to help in
the community and is actively involved in church.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 14 April  1972  in  the
grade of airman basic for a period of four years.

On 14 October 1972, the applicant wrongfully had in his possession, 1-
gram of marijuana.  He received an Article 15 and received a suspended
reduction to airman basic and was fined $150.

Applicant was discharged on 5 July 1973, in the grade of  airman  with
an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge, under  the
provisions AFM 39-12 (for the good of the service).  He served 1 year,
2 months, and 22 days total active duty service.





Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of  investigation,
Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative report, which  is
attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommended the discharge be  upgraded  to  general  (under
honorable conditions) on the basis of  clemency  if  a  check  of  the
Federal Bureau  of  Investigation  files  proves  negative  since  the
discharge was over 28 years ago and in consideration of  the  type  of
offenses.  They indicate that based  upon  the  documentation  in  the
file, they believe the discharge was consistent  with  the  procedural
and   substantive   requirements   of   the   discharge    regulation.
Additionally, the discharge was within the  sound  discretion  of  the
discharge authority.  The applicant did not submit any new evidence or
identify any errors or  injustices  that  occurred  in  the  discharge
processing.

The evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 21 December 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.

On 18 March 2002, a copy of the FBI Investigation was forwarded to the
applicant for review and response within fourteen (14)  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.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of probable error or injustice warranting an upgrade  of
the applicant’s discharge.  After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of
record, we are not persuaded that the applicant has been the victim of
either an error or an injustice.  The  discharge  apparently  complied
with the governing regulation in effect at that  time;  therefore,  we
believe his  separation  was  appropriate.   We  took  notice  of  the
applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case;
however, the Board is of the opinion that the applicant has  not  been
the victim of an error or injustice.

4.     Although   the   applicant   did   not   specifically   request
consideration based on clemency, we also find insufficient evidence to
warrant a recommendation that the discharge be upgraded on that basis.
 Applicant has not provided information of his post-service activities
and accomplishments after being provided  an  opportunity  to  present
such information to the Board.  Therefore, based on  the  evidence  of
record,  we  cannot  conclude  that  clemency  is  warranted.   Should
applicant provide statements from community leaders and  acquaintances
attesting to his good character and reputation and other  evidence  of
successful post-service rehabilitation, this Board would be willing to
review this information for possible  reconsideration  of  this  case.
However, we cannot recommend approval based on the current evidence of
record.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of probable  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 01-
01140 in Executive Session on 18 April 2002 under  the  provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Roger E. Willmeth, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Clarence D. Long, III, Member
                 Ms. Martha Maust, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 August 2001, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  FBI Investigation.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 7 December 2001.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 December 2001.





                                   ROGER E. WILLMETH
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002452

    Original file (0002452.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of investigation, Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Military Personnel Management Specialist, Separations Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed this application and states that the applicant did not provide evidence of error in his discharge case. However since the discharge occurred over 43 years ago and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9903267

    Original file (9903267.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 19 June 1953, he was discharged from the Air Force with a bad conduct discharge. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Military Personnel Management Specialist, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed the application and states the applicant had two previous summary courts- martial for being...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200237

    Original file (0200237.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 23 March 1955, applicant was notified of his commander's intent to initiate discharge action against him for the following reasons: On 1 October 1952, the applicant received a summary court-martial for failure to repair and was demoted to airman basic, received 45 days’ restriction and was fined $50. On 22 June 1955, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied applicant’s request for an upgrade of his undesirable discharge to an honorable discharge. On 19 March...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0102263

    Original file (0102263.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002359

    Original file (0002359.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Military Personnel Specialist, Separations Branch, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed this application and states that member’s records show he had repeated infractions and the attempts to rehabilitate him were unsuccessful. Accordingly, we recommend that the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002026

    Original file (0002026.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Military Personnel Specialist, Separations Branch, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed this application and states that member’s records show he had repeated infractions and the attempts to rehabilitate him were unsuccessful. Accordingly, we recommend that the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 0000698

    Original file (0000698.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-00698 INDEX CODE: 110.00 APPLICANT (Deceased) COUNSEL: None SSN HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His late father’s under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, D.C., provided an investigative...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01140

    Original file (BC-2004-01140.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant waived his right to a hearing before an administrative discharge board, chose not to submit a statement in his own behalf, and requested not to be considered for the probation and rehabilitation (P&R) program. The discharge authority approved the discharge on 18 March 1974 and ordered an undesirable characterization without P&R. While we note the applicant’s assertion that he has not been in any trouble since his separation, the seriousness of the offenses for which the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0001426

    Original file (0001426.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be granted (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). Available Master Personnel Records C. Advisory Opinions D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion E. FBI Report F. AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding FBI Report

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01937

    Original file (BC-2003-01937.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 03-01937 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. Applicant’s application is at Exhibit A. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provided a copy of an investigative report pertaining to the...