Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC 2007 04049
Original file (BC 2007 04049.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-04049
		INDEX CODE:  110.00
		
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His under other than honorable conditions (undesirable) 
discharge be upgraded to honorable.
________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

At the time of his discharge his military attorney assured him 
that after two years without any further incidents his discharge 
would convert to honorable.

He has been straight since 1970.  He has not had any alcohol in 
over 30 years.  He is a solid citizen and has a wonderful 
family.

In support of his request, applicant provided his personal 
statement and five character references.

The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________
_

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 26 Jun 67, for a 
period of four years in the grade of airman basic.

His commander recommended appropriate action be initiated under 
the provisions of AFM 39-12 to separate him with an undesirable 
discharge for a history of incidents of a discreditable nature.  
The following is the basis of the commander’s recommendation:

      a.  Applicant received an Article 15 for being drunk on 
station on or about (o/a) 25 Mar 68.
      
      b.  Applicant received an Article 15 for failure to go to 
his appointed place of duty o/a 2 Jul 68.
      
      c.  Applicant received a Summary court-martial for having a 
female guest in his barracks room o/a 31 Jul 68.
      
      d.  Applicant received an Article 15 for using provoking 
words towards another airman o/a 22 Feb 69.
      
      e.  Applicant received an Article 15 for being disorderly 
on station o/a 13 May 69. 
      
      f.  Applicant was pending a Special court-martial at the 
time of his discharge for reckless driving, wrongful 
appropriation of a vehicle, and failure to go. 

On 27 May 69, after consulting with counsel, applicant requested 
discharge for the good of the service and acknowledged that if 
his request for discharge was approved, he could receive an 
undesirable discharge.

The discharge authority approved applicant’s request and he was 
discharged on 7 Jul 69, in the grade of airman basic, under the 
provisions of AFM 39-12, by reason of request for discharge for 
the good of the service, with service characterized as under 
other than honorable conditions (undesirable).  He served on 
active duty for a period of 2 years and 12 days.  

Pursuant to the Board’s request on 23 Jan 08, the Federal Bureau 
of Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, indicated on 25 Jan 
08, that, on the basis of data furnished, they are unable to 
locate an arrest record (Exhibit C).

________________________________________________________________
_

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.  We took notice 
of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of 
the case; however, we find no evidence of an error or injustice 
that occurred in the discharge processing.  Based on the 
available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was 
consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge 
regulation and within the commander's discretionary authority.  
The applicant has provided no evidence which would lead us to 
believe the characterization of the service was contrary to the 
provisions of the governing regulation, unduly harsh, or 
disproportionate to the offenses committed.  We considered 
upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not 
find the evidence presented is sufficient to compel us to 
recommend granting the relief sought on that basis.  Therefore, 
in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis 
upon which to recommend granting the relief sought.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not 
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel 
will materially add to our understanding of the issue involved.  
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably 
considered.

________________________________________________________________
_

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 Docket Number    
BC-2007-04049 in Executive Session on 28 February 2008, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	XXXXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair
	XXXXXXXXXXXX, Member
	XXXXXXXXXXXX, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number 
BC-2007-04049 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, undated, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  FBI Negative Reply, dated 25 Jan 08.




								XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
								Panel Chair



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02902

    Original file (BC-2006-02902.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board recommended the applicant be turned over to the Corrections Division and a majority of the Board recommended the applicant for administrative separation. On 30 Apr 71, applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFM 39-12, with service characterized as under other than honorable conditions, in the grade of airman basic and was issued an undesirable discharge certificate. Applicant contends that he was hearing voices while on active duty but didn't report it.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01271

    Original file (BC-2007-01271.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. Applicant’s record reflects he received an Article 15 vacation of suspended reduction to airman on 18 Nov 69. Based on this, his date of rank (DOR) to airman should have been 15 Jul 69 (date original Article 15 was imposed) with an effective date of 18 Nov 69 (date of vacation of suspended reduction).

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02655

    Original file (BC-2003-02655.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC 2007 03549

    Original file (BC 2007 03549.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The case file was found legally sufficient and the discharge authority approved the separation. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF THE FBI REPORT: Applicant states at the time he submitted his application, he based it on his active duty service records. There is one conviction he is challenging through the courts in a remedy known as Post-Conviction Relief.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-00837

    Original file (BC-2005-00837.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02159

    Original file (BC-2003-02159.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He had problems during basic training and had to complete three extra months at basic. His grade at the time of discharge was airman basic, with an effective date and date of rank of 16 Jul 69. Therefore, based on the available evidence of record, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider this application.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00767

    Original file (BC-2007-00767.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    At the time of the applicant’s discharge, AFM 39-12, Chap 2, paragraph 2-25, stated an airman discharged under this section should be furnished an Undesirable Discharge, unless the particular circumstances in a given case warrant a general or honorable discharge (Exhibit C). The discharge appears to be in compliance with the governing regulations and we find no evidence to indicate that his separation from the Air Force was inappropriate. Although the applicant did not specifically...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02780

    Original file (BC-2005-02780.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02780 INDEX CODE: 107.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 12 MAR 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be given credit for service in Vietnam, award of the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM) for service in Vietnam in Oct 69 and award of the Small Arms Expert Marksmanship...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00992

    Original file (BC-2004-00992.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    A general discharge was recommended. The discharge authority approved his request and directed that he be discharged for the good of the service and that he be furnished an Undesirable Discharge certificate. His request was considered and denied by the AFBCMR on 15 Mar 73 (Exhibit A).

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-02783

    Original file (BC-2012-02783.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 10 Dec 70, the Air Force Military Personnel Center (AFMPC) reviewed the case and recommended disapproval stating there was insufficient justification to support a waiver of the one year ADSC. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to compel us to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis. _________________________________________________________________ The following...