RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01611
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to
general under honorable conditions.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His discharge was not equitable because it was issued to him as his only
choice based on an isolated incident. He had 24 months and 5 days prior
active service with no previous adverse actions.
In support of his application, the applicant provided a personal statement
on his application. The applicant’s submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force in the grade of airman
basic (E-1) on 9 November 1971 for a period of 4 years. He was
progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class. During his
enlistment he received one Airman Performance Report for the period 15
January 1973 - 22 May 1973 with an overall evaluation of five (5).
On 21 August 1973, he failed to go to his place of duty, the Base Spruce
Up, at the appointed time and remained absent until on or about 27 August
1973. For this incident, his commander imposed punishment by Article 15.
The applicant’s discharge case file was apparently lost or destroyed. His
discharge document reveals that he was discharged under other than
honorable conditions (UOTHC) on 9 November 1971 under the provisions of AFM
39-12 with a separation code of 246 (Request for Discharge for the Good of
the Service). He had served 2 years and 12 days on active duty with 6 days
of time lost (21 - 26 August 1973). A reenlistment (RE) code of 2 was
assigned.
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
provided a copy of an investigative report pertaining to the applicant,
which is at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be approved. DPPRS states that
considering the discharge was 28 years ago, the type of offense, and the
lack of information in his files, they recommend clemency. If a check of
the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) proves negative, DPPRS
recommends, based on clemency, the discharge be upgraded to under honorable
conditions (general). DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 14 June 2002, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant for review and comment. As of this date, this office has
received no response (Exhibit D).
On 10 July 2002, a copy of the FBI report was forwarded to the applicant
for review and comment. As of this date, this office has received no
response (Exhibit E).
_________________________________________________________________
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. After careful consideration of the
available evidence, we found no indication that the actions taken to effect
his discharge were improper or contrary to the provisions of the governing
regulations in effect at the time, or that the actions taken against the
applicant were based on factors other than his own misconduct. In
addition, in view of the contents of the FBI Identification Record we are
not persuaded that the characterization of the applicant’s discharge
warrants an upgrade to general under honorable conditions on the basis of
clemency. Having found no error or injustice with regard to the actions
that occurred while the applicant was a military member, we conclude that
no basis exists to grant favorable action on his request.
_________________________________________________________________
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 this application AFBCMR
Docket Number 01-03486 in Executive Session on 21 August 2002, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Lawrence R. Leehy, Panel Chair
Mr. Mike Novel, Member
Ms. Marilyn Thomas, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 22 May 2002 w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 5 June 2002.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 June 2002.
Exhibit E. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 10 July 2002.
LAWRENCE R. LEEHY
Panel Chair
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01300 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His discharge be upgraded to honorable. Considered alone, we conclude the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01770
---, which is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS states that the applicant provided no facts warranting an upgrade of his discharge. Exhibit B. LAWRENCE R. LEEHY Panel Chair AFBCMR 02-01770 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...
The commander, on 25 Jun 56, determined that applicant was guilty of the offenses and imposed punishment consisting of a reduction to the grade of airman first class (permanent) and a reprimand. The commander, on 12 Jul 56, determined that applicant was guilty of the offenses and imposed punishment consisting of reduction to the grade of airman second class (permanent) and a reprimand. Should he provide such evidence (as relayed in our letter), of good conduct for the period of time which...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Assistant NCOIC, Separation Procedures Section, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed applicant’s request and states that considering the discharge was almost 30 years ago, the type of offenses committed, and the fact that the member received a psychiatrist’s recommendation that he should have been administratively separated, clemency is recommended. Applicant indicated that she does not wish to provide a response to...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Separations Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRS reviewed this application and recommended the discharge be upgraded to an under honorable conditions (general) discharge if a check of the FBI files proves negative. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show...
In support of his application, the applicant provided copies of an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board and his separation documents (Exhibit A). Based on the limited evidence available for the Board’s review, we are not persuaded that further relief in the form of an upgrade of his discharge to honorable is warranted. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 13 April 2001.
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). 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. Therefore, based on the evidence of record, we cannot conclude that clemency is warranted.
Under our broader mandate and after careful consideration of all the facts and circumstances of applicant's case, the Board is persuaded that applicant has been a productive member of society since leaving the service. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 21 Jan 60, he was discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). JOSEPH G. DIAMOND Panel...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02414
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02414 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. Exhibit C. FBI Report. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 September 2002.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02234
In support of the application, the applicant submits a statement from the former member’s daughter, an Air Force Discharge Review Board application, a Certification of Military Service, an Honorable Discharge Certificate (AF Reserves), a medical prognosis, letter from National Personnel Records Center, and a general power of attorney. Applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors in the discharge processing, nor provide facts that support upgrading the discharge to honorable....