RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01417
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to general (under honorable
conditions).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He had seen his dad get his head blown off at the early age of 14. He
never got over this tragic moment in his life once he entered the Air
Force. He hopes the Board finds it possible to change his discharge to
general. He was told by the Air Force that he could get his discharge
changed after 6 years and it has now been 30 years.
Applicant’s complete submission, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 11 October 1968 and was
progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class.
On 20 April 1970, he was tried by a special court-martial for two incidents
of absent without leave (AWOL). The first time, he was AWOL from 9
December 1969 to 4 January 1970 and again, from 12 January to 12 March
1970. He was confinement at hard labor for 3 months, forfeited $50 per
month for 3 months and reduced from airman first class to airman basic and
discharged from the service. The Clemency Board reviewed the case and
considered all matters including comments and recommendations on 30 April
1970. The Board approved the sentence and forwarded the record of trial to
the Judge Advocate General of the U. S. Air Force for review. The
discharge was confirmed and executed in accordance with Special Court
Martial Order #36, 12 Jun 70, and he was discharged 22 Jun 70. He served 1
year, 3 months, and 15 days on active duty.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial and states that the applicant did not submit
any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the
discharge processing. He provided no other facts warranting an upgrade of
the discharge. Upon review of the applicant’s DD Form 214, Armed Forces of
the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, we noted that “Character
of Service” Block 13a, shows the applicant received an “Under Other Than
Honorable Conditions” (UOTHC) discharge; however, based on the final
Special Court-Martial Order #36 (dated 12 June 1979) an the original
sentence, it should read, “Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD).” A discharge of
UOTHC is less severe than a BCD. We defer to the Board to determine if
this should be changed in accordance with documentation contained in his
records.
AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 30 May
2003 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, this office
has received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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 an error or injustice. After a thorough review of the evidence
of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that any
corrective action is warranted. We therefore agree with the
recommendations of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed as the
basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden
of having suffered either an error or an injustice. The only other basis
upon which to upgrade his discharge would be based on clemency. However,
the applicant has failed to provide documentation pertaining to his post-
service activities. Should he provide documentary evidence pertaining to
his post-service activities we would be willing to reconsider his appeal.
In the absence of such evidence, favorable action is not recommended.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate
the existence of a 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 Docket Number BC-2003-01417
in Executive Session on 29 July 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Panel Chair
Mr. Vaughn E. Schlunz, Member
Mr. John L. Robuck, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Apr 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 19 May 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 May 03.
OLGA M. CRERAR
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00464
In support of his request, the applicant submits a copy of his DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States. On 20 Oct 70, the applicant received notification that he was being recommended for discharge for unfitness. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice;...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01522
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01522 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 25 January 1984, applicant waived his right to an administrative discharge board contingent upon receiving a general discharge. A general discharge was recommended...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01496
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided extracts from his available military personnel records. The basis of the applicant's request for relief was insufficient to warrant setting aside the Article 15 action, and did not demonstrate an equitable basis for relief. By letter, dated 19 Aug 03, the Board's staff requested that the applicant provide information pertaining to his activities since leaving the service.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00912
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00912 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2B, “Separated with a general or under-other-than-honorable-conditions (UOTHC) discharge,” be changed. For these actions, she received an LOR, which was placed in her existing UIF. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00317
On 26 Jun 87, the First Sergeant counseled applicant concerning his failure to pay the debt of $380. On 17 Jul 87, after consulting with counsel and having been advised of his rights, applicant submitted a conditional waiver of his rights associated with an administrative discharge board hearing contingent on his receipt of a general discharge. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Jun 03.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01032
His emotional volatility, alcohol and substance abuse, and immaturity really clouded his judgment. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of a material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance;...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03730
The applicant did not submit any new evidence nor provide facts warranting an upgrade of his discharge. However, as of this date, this office has received no response. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicant’s complete submission, we are not persuaded that a change to his characterization of service is warranted.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02689
He was separated on 22 January 1993 after serving three (3) months and twenty-nine (29) days on active duty and was issued a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of “2C.” _____________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial. The DPPAT evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03291
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03291 INDEX NUMBER: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her deceased husband’s DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be corrected to show that his grade at the time of discharge was technical sergeant (E-6). ...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02469
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that although he contends he provided medical information for the three years up to the time of his enlistment, there is no evidence to confirm this. The Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPRS reviewed this application and states they concur with the Medical Consultant’s evaluation and recommend no...