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.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
During his time in the service he had a problem with alcohol and there were
no programs to treat this disease. Since his discharge the problem has
been corrected.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a copy of his DD Form 214,
Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge and a
letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs, dated 13 August 2002.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
During the time period in question, the applicant enlisted in the Regular
Air Force on 17 August 1966 in the grade of airman basic for a period of
four (4) years.
On 27 February 1970, the applicant was notified of his commander's intent
to initiate discharge action against him for unfitness. He did, at Cigli
AB, Turkey, during the period 10 March 1969 through 6 February 1970, have
frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military and civilian
authorities and established a pattern of financial irresponsibility.
The commander indicated in his recommendation for discharge action that
attempts were made at rehabilitation and the results of these attempts: the
member had been counseled by his immediate NCOIC, First Sergeant,
Administrative Officer and Squadron Commander almost weekly regarding his
financial obligations and other personal problems. His supervisor had done
everything humanly possible in aiding this individual in solving his
financial problems and behavior. Efforts of all supervisors concerned
failed to make any lasting improvement.
The commander advised the applicant of his right to present his case before
an administrative discharge board, consult legal counsel and submit
statements in his own behalf; or waive the above rights after consulting
with counsel.
On 5 March 1970, after consulting with counsel, applicant waived his right
to appear before an administrative discharge board and to submit statements
in his own behalf.
On 27 March 1970, the discharge authority approved the discharge.
Applicant was discharged on 14 April 1970, in the grade of airman first
class with an under other than honorable (UOTHC) discharge, under the
provisions of AFM 39-12, (Unfitness). He served a total of 3 years, 7
months, and 28 days on his last enlistment and 6 years, 9 months and 25
days of total military service.
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an Investigative Report, which is at
Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial. They indicated 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 discretion of the discharge
authority.
The applicant did not identify any specific errors in the discharge
processing. However, considering the discharge occurred 32 years ago, his
previous honorable discharge, the nature of his offenses and his alcohol
problem, they recommend clemency. If a check of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation files proves negative, they recommend the discharge be
upgraded to under honorable conditions (general). He has not filed a
timely request.
The evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 6 September 2002, 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 23 September 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. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to warrant an upgrade
of the applicant’s discharge solely on the basis of clemency. In this
regard, no evidence has been presented which would lead the Board to
believe the applicant’s discharge was improper or contrary to the directive
under which it was effected. However, we note that AFPC/DPPRS recommends
clemency, if an FBI report is clean on the basis that the discharge is over
32 years old and considering the type of offenses. The Board notes the FBI
report does contain some entries; however, with the exception of an entry
while on active duty and one entry in 1983, the offenses were either
dismissed or the charges were reduced. Therefore, the Board is of the
opinion that upgrading the applicant’s discharge to general (under
honorable conditions), based on clemency would be appropriate. Applicant’s
request for fully honorable discharge was considered; however, we do not
believe the overall record supports a further upgrade. Therefore, we
recommend the applicant's records be corrected to the extent indicated
below.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating
to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 14 April 1970, he was discharged
with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions).
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number 02-03667
in Executive Session on 7 November 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Panel Chair
Mr. James W. Russell III, Member
Mr. Thomas J. Topolski, Jr., Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The following
documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 24 July 2002 w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. FBI Report.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 26 August 2002.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 September 2002.
Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 23 September 2002.
WAYNE R. GRACIE
Panel Chair
AFBCMR 02-02414
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 14 April 1970, he was
discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable
conditions).
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
The recommendation for discharge for misconduct was approved and the commander directed that applicant be given an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. On 23 Dec 83, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39- 10 (Misconduct-Pattern of Minor Disciplinary Infractions) in the grade of airman first class with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge and an RE code of 2B (Separated with other than an honorable discharge). Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS,...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03060
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS stated that the applicant’s personnel records did not include any information as to why he received a general discharge versus an honorable discharge. As of this date, this office has received no response (Exhibit E). WAYNE R. GRACIE Panel Chair AFBCMR 02-03060 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03060
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS stated that the applicant’s personnel records did not include any information as to why he received a general discharge versus an honorable discharge. As of this date, this office has received no response (Exhibit E). WAYNE R. GRACIE Panel Chair AFBCMR 02-03060 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00138
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00138 INDEX CODE 106.00 COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 16 JULY 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, D.C.,...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01029
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01029 INDEX CODE: A50.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His other than honorable conditions (undesirable) discharge be upgraded to general. The evidence of record reflects that the applicant was discharged for unfitness. Exhibit F. Letter, applicant, dated 13 Jul 02, w/atchs.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00295
DPPRS states that based on the documentation on file in the applicant’s master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. Additionally, the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing, and she provided no facts warranting an upgrade of her discharge. Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 15 Feb 06.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00299
The board recommended he be discharged because of unsatisfactory duty performance with a general discharge without rehabilitation. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice warranting upgrading the applicant’s discharge. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice and...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01261
The discharge was approved on 2 March 2000, and on 6 March 2000, he was discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions) and issued RE Code 2B (Separated with a general or under-other- than-honorable-conditions (UOTHC) discharge). He completed 2 years and 3 days of active service. On 3 October 2002, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied his request to upgrade his discharge to honorable.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02190
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report, which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS believes the 25 Sep 57 general discharge was consistent with the discharge regulation in effect at the time and within the discretion of the discharge authority. They believe the...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01955 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. That office indicates that the applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge proceedings. After a...