ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-1983-01854
INDEX CODES: A94.07 & A91.05
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 30 August 1983, the Board considered applicant’s request that his UOTHC
discharge be upgraded. The Board found insufficient evidence of an error
or injustice and denied the application. For an accounting of the facts
and circumstances surrounding the application, and the rationale of the
earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit D.
The applicant requests reconsideration of his application on the basis of
clemency and provides additional documentation. The applicant’s complete
submissions, with attachments, are at Exhibits E, G, I, K, M through R, T
through W, and Y through EE.
Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI), Clarksburg, WV, provided an investigative report which is attached
at Exhibit HH. The applicant’s complete response to the FBI investigative
report is at Exhibit II.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and the additional
documentation submitted by the applicant, we find no impropriety in the
characterization of his discharge. It appears that responsible officials
applied appropriate standards in effecting the separation, and we do not
find persuasive evidence that pertinent regulations were violated or that
applicant was not afforded all the rights to which entitled at the time of
discharge. We conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were
proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the
existing circumstances.
2. We also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the
discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency. We have considered the
applicant's overall quality of service and the events which precipitated
the discharge; however, based on the evidence of record, we cannot conclude
that clemency is warranted.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the additional 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 Docket Number BC-1983-01854
in Executive Session on 10 June 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Panel Chair
Ms. Deborah A. Erickson, Member
Mr. Christopher D. Carey, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit D. Record of Proceedings, w/atchs.
Exhibit E. DD Form 149, 4 Mar 86, w/atchs.
Exhibit F. Letter, AFMPC/DPMARS2, dated 0 May 86.
Exhibit G. Letter, Applicant, undated.
Exhibit H. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 30 Dec 86.
Exhibit I. DD Form 149, dated 15 Oct 90.
Exhibit J. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 26 Mar 91.
Exhibit K. DD Form 293, dated 9 Jun 00.
Exhibit L. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 7 May 01.
Exhibit M. Letter, Applicant, dated Jun 01.
Exhibit N. Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atchs.
Exhibit O. Letter, Applicant, dated 13 Aug 01, w/atch.
Exhibit P. Letter, Delmar Apartments, dated 13 Aug 01.
Exhibit Q. Letter, American Indian Center, dated 20 Aug 01.
Exhibit R. Letter, Applicant, dated 20 Nov 01, w/atchs.
Exhibit S. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 8 Nov 01, w/atchs.
Exhibit T. Letter, Applicant, dated 20 Nov 01, w/atchs.
Exhibit U. Letter, Applicant, dated 4 Dec 01, w/atchs.
Exhibit V. Memo, Applicant, dated 6 Dec 01.
Exhibit W. Letter, Applicant, dated 20 Dec 01, w/atchs.
Exhibit X. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 3 Jan 02.
Exhibit Y. Letter, Applicant, dated 7 Jan 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit Z. Letter, Applicant, dated 14 Jan 02.
Exhibit AA. Character References.
Exhibit BB. Letter, Taylor Business Institute,
dated 27 Feb 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit CC. Letter, Applicant, dated 5 Apr 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit DD. Letter, Applicant, dated 24 Apr 02.
Exhibit EE. Letter, Applicant, dated 12 Jul 03.
Exhibit FF. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 24 Jul 03.
Exhibit GG. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 22 Apr 04.
Exhibit HH. FBI Investigative Report.
Exhibit II. Card, Applicant, dated 14 May 04.
BRENDA L. ROMINE
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02153
Based on the limited documentation in the applicant’s file, they found that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation in effect at the time of his discharge. The complete Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit D. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 22 Aug 03 for review and comment within...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03770
On 2 May 57, the US Air Force Board of Review affirmed the findings of guilty and the sentence. On 16 Sep 57, the convening authority mitigated the dishonorable discharge to a bad conduct discharge and he was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-18 with a bad conduct discharge in the grade of airman basic, with service characterized as under other than honorable conditions. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02655
On 13 Aug 70, the base commander recommended approval of an undesirable discharge. On 18 Aug 70, the discharge authority approved an undesirable discharge and directed that the applicant be issued a DD Form 258AF, “Undesirable Discharge Certificate.” On 24 Aug 70, applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFM 39-12, with service characterized as other than honorable. Having found insufficient evidence of an error or injustice with regard to the actions that occurred while...
On 12 Apr 78, the Air Force Discharge Review Board denied an appeal from the applicant to upgrade his discharge. _______________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial of the applicant’s request. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant indicates in his response that the Air Force evaluation contained an error,...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00406
On that same date, applicant acknowledged receipt of the administrative discharge action and waived his entitlement to appear before a board of officers and requested discharge in lieu of board proceedings. On 23 Dec 58, the discharge authority approved a general discharge and directed that the applicant be issued a DD Form 257AF, “General Discharge.” On 31 Dec 58, applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-16, with service characterized as under honorable conditions. A...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02855
If the Board cannot pardon him or chooses not to do so, he requests that his FBI record be corrected to reflect that he was only arrested once, not twice as his record reflects. On 6 Oct 00, the applicant requested a waiver of his “4F” RE code to allow him to reenlist in the Air Force. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE recommends denial of the applicant’s request to change his RE code.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPW recommends that the applicant’s lost time remain on his DD Form 214. Lost time must be recorded on the DD Form 214 for members who have had lost time during an enlistment, even if the applicant has made all the lost time good.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03779
The remaining 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 at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ ARPC/DPS recommends the application be denied. The coverage, by law, was automatic for all members of the Armed Forces who had a spouse and/or children, unless the member decline coverage. As of this...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-02355
Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the applicant’s General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge for unsatisfactory performance was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the commander’s discretionary authority. In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists to upgrade the applicant’s General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 31...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02398
The applicant’s medical records indicate she began experiencing headaches during pregnancy but they markedly increased two months following her delivery in Nov 01. The IPEB concluded her headaches were unfitting for continued military services, rated the headaches at 10%, and recommended discharge with severance pay. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the...