ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-01940
INDEX CODE 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, he requests that his under
other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 14 September 1967, the applicant was discharged with an under than
honorable conditions discharge for conviction by civil court for two counts
of armed robbery. At the time of his separation, he was credited with 11
months and 25 days of active duty service.
On 10 June 1977, the applicant’s request that his discharge be upgraded to
honorable was considered and denied by the Air Force Discharge Review Board
(AFDRB). His case was reheard and denied by the AFDRB on 14 December
1979(see Exhibit B).
A similar appeal was considered and denied by the Board on 3 October 2001.
For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the
applicant’s separation, and, the rationale for the earlier decision by the
Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit F.
On 30 November 2001, the applicant submitted a request for reconsideration,
contending that he has suffered the effects of an undesirable discharge for
over 30 years. To support this assertion, the applicant provided a
personal statement and copies of correspondence of character references.
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit G.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
After again reviewing this application and the evidence provided in support
of the appeal, the board majority is persuaded that an upgrade of the
applicant’s discharge is warranted. We are of the opinion that the
applicant has provided sufficient evidence to lead us to conclude that in
the years following his separation, he has made a successful adjustment to
civilian life. In view of this and the fact that the government of Canada
has issued him a pardon, the Board majority believes the continued
imposition of the undesirable discharge serves no useful purpose and that,
on the basis of clemency, its stigma should be removed from his records.
Accordingly, the Board majority recommends his records be corrected as
indicated below.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating
to APPLIANT be corrected to show that on 14 September 1967, the applicant
was honorably discharged and furnished an Honorable Discharge certificate.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive
Session on 11 December 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. John L. Robuck, Panel Chair
Mr. Clarence D. Long III, Member
Ms. Marcia J. Bachman, Member
By a majority vote, the Board recommended to grant the application. Mr.
Robuck voted not to grant an honorable discharge; however to upgrade his
discharge to general (under honorable conditions) and submits a minority
report which is at Exhibit H. The following documentary evidence was
considered:
Exhibit F. Record of Proceedings, dated 3 October 2001,
with Exhibits.
Exhibit G. Applicant’s DD Form 149, dated 30 November 2001,
with attachments.
Exhibit H. Minority Report, dated 11 December 2001.
JOHN L. ROBUCK
Panel Chair
AFBCMR 01-01940
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 on 14 September 1967, he was
honorably discharged and furnished an Honorable Discharge certificate.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
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). 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 action.
On 7 May 54, he received an undesirable discharge from the Air Force. By letter dated 27 August 2001, it was requested that the applicant provide evidence pertaining to his post-service activities (Exhibit G). Exhibit B.
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-00201, Cse 2 INDEX CODE: 111.02 APPLICANT COUNSEL: NO SSN HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, he requests the Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) closing 31 May 90 be removed and replaced with the “5” EPR closing 31 May 90 and in Section V of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03376
On 11 Dec 59 and 18 Oct 78, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request that his discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-00823-2
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00823 INDEX CODE: 111.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, he requests his Enlisted Performance Report (EPR), rendered for the period 16 Feb 02 through 17 Nov 02, be declared void and removed from his records; and, that his...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00141
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00141 INDEX CODES: 108.00, 121.02, 123.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect that he is entitled to payment for lost time from 24 Nov 70 to 4 Feb 71 and six (6) days of forfeited accrued leave. ...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02024 INDEX CODE: A79.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, WV, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. The remaining...
At that time, the applicant was also invited to provide additional evidence pertaining to his activities since leaving the service (Exhibit G). After careful consideration of the available facts contained in the Air Force Discharge Review Board brief surrounding the applicant’s discharge, we find no impropriety in the characterization of the applicant’s discharge. Exhibit B.
On 18 November 1996, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB), denied applicant’s request for an upgrade of and change of reason for his discharge. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: A majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be denied. Exhibit B.
The evidence provided does not show to our satisfaction that his performance was not accurately depicted by the contested reports, or the reports were based on factors other than his performance, a majority of the Board adheres to the original decision and concludes that no basis exists to ,act favorably on the applicant's requests. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice; that...