RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00256
INDEX CODE: 110.02
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His undesirable discharge be upgraded.
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Applicant did not present any contentions.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
___________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 11 Sep 67. Prior to
the events under review, applicant was promoted to the grade of
airman first class with an effective date and date of rank of
1 Apr 68.
He received one performance report with an overall evaluation of 6.
On 12 Sep 68, he received an Article 15 punishment for failure to
go to his appointed place of duty on or about 3 Sep 68 and on or
about 4 Sep 68. His punishment consisted of a suspended reduction
in grade to the rank of airman for six months and 45 days of extra
duty.
Applicant was absent without leave (AWOL) from 6 Mar 69 until his
return to military control on 14 Apr 69. He was dropped from the
rolls on 4 Apr 69.
On 17 Apr 69, after consulting with counsel, applicant submitted a
request for discharge for the good of the service. On 2 May 69,
the group commander recommended the applicant’s request be
approved. His recommendation was based on the applicant being AWOL
from 6 Mar to 15 Apr 69, and because he was not able to adapt to
military standards of work, discipline and conduct. On that same
day, the wing commander recommended approval of the applicant’s
request to be discharged for the good of the service.
On 12 May 69, the discharge authority approved the discharge, and
directed the applicant be furnished an Undesirable Discharge
Certificate (DD Form 256AF).
On 14 May 69, applicant was discharged under the provisions of
AFM 39-12, with service characterized as under other than honorable
conditions and was issued an undesirable discharge certificate. He
was credited with 1 year, 7 months, and 24 days of active duty
service during this enlistment (excludes 40 days due to AWOL).
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative
report which is attached at Exhibit C.
___________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommended applicant’s request be denied. Based on
the documentation in the file, they found the discharge consistent
with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge
regulation. Additionally, the discharge was within the sound
discretion of the discharge authority. They also noted applicant
did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or
injustices that occurred in the discharge processing and provided
no other facts warranting a change to his character of service.
A complete copy of the 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 29 Oct 04 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this
date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E).
On 21 Dec 04, a copy of the FBI report was forwarded to the
applicant for comment. At that time, the applicant was also
invited to provide additional evidence pertaining to his activities
since leaving the service (Exhibit F). 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. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. After careful
consideration of the evidence of record, we found no evidence that
the actions taken to effect the applicant’s discharge were improper
or contrary to the provisions of the governing manual in effect at
the time, or that the actions taken against him were based on
factors other than his own misconduct. Based on his overall record
of service and the absence of evidence related to his post-service
activities and accomplishments, we are not persuaded that an
upgrade of the characterization of his discharge is warranted. If
he were to submit post-service documentation, the Board may be
willing to reconsider his appeal as a matter of clemency.
Therefore, based on the available evidence of record, we find no
basis upon which to favorably consider this application.
___________________________________________________________________
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 AFBCMR Docket Number
BC-2003-00256 in Executive Session on 2 February 2005, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Roscoe Hinton Jr., Panel Chair
Mr. Vance E. Lineberger, Member
Mr. Wallace F. Beard Jr., Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Sep 04, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. FBI Report of Investigation.
Exhibit D. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 22 Oct 04.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Oct 04.
Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 21 Dec 04, w/atchs.
ROSCOE HINTON JR.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02867
On 24 Feb 97, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request to have his discharge upgraded to honorable. A complete copy of the 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 15 Oct 04 for review and comment within 30 days. Based on his overall record of service, the contents of the FBI...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00383
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00383 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). On 28 August 1974, the commander recommended that the applicant be discharged from the Air Force with an honorable discharge. Exhibit E. Letter,...
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...
The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s available limited military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS states based upon the lack of...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-00837
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit D. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant provided additional evidence as to why the character of his discharge should be upgraded. He volunteered to serve in Vietnam and served eight months in Vietnam before the first AWOL. It has been 24 years since he was discharged.
Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, WV, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Separations Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, stated that the applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. Since his discharge occurred over 48 years ago and considering he was only 19...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02418
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 0202418 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded so he can be buried in a national cemetery. AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant's sister...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03507
On 7 Oct 92, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied the applicant’s request for upgrade of his discharge to honorable. They also noted applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing and provided no other facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge. After careful consideration of the evidence of record, we found no evidence that the actions taken to effect the applicant’s discharge were improper or...
The applicant was discharged with a bad conduct discharge on 12 August 1968. The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states that his General Court-Martial is news to him since he was not at the base at the time. Applicant’s rebuttal is at Exhibit E. On 3 June 2002, a letter was forwarded to the applicant suggesting that he consider providing evidence pertaining to his...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01015
On 11 Jul 77, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied the applicant’s request to upgrade his UOTHC discharge. The applicant has provided no persuasive evidence showing the actions taken against him were based on factors other than his own misconduct or that his discharge was unjust, improper, or contrary to the provisions of the governing regulations in effect at the time. Exhibit D. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 19 Apr 06.