RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00727
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general, under honorable conditions (UHC) discharge be upgraded to
honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was accused of not supporting his spouse while he was serving in
Vietnam. The statements are untrue. His character of service didn’t
bother him until recently.
In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided a statement from
his spouse and a copy of an DD form 257AF, General Discharge
Certificate.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 19 November 1965. He
was progressively promoted to the grade of sergeant (E-4) with a date
of rank (DOR) of 1 October 1967. On 4 November 1969 his commander
notified him of his intent to issue the applicant a general discharge
in accordance with Air Force Manual 39-10 for a history of financial
irresponsibility. An Unfavorable Information File (UIF) was
established on the applicant as, between the dates of 21 May 1968 and
28 October 1969, he received 11 letters of indebtedness, a written
reprimand for financial irresponsibility and a warrant for non support
of his family from a West Virginia Justice of the Peace. He was
repeatedly counseled verbally by his supervisor, First Sergeant, and
commander. He acknowledged receipt of his commander’s letter of
intent and indicated he would not submit statements or rebuttals in
his behalf. The general discharge was found legally sufficient on 13
November 1969. He was discharged under honorable conditions for
Expiration Term of Service (ETS) effective 18 November 1969 after
serving for 7 years, 11 months, and 27 days.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
None. The applicant has not shown the characterization of his
discharge was contrary to the provisions of AFR 39-17, Unfitness,
(Exhibit C). Nor has he shown the nature of the discharge was unduly
harsh or disproportionate to the offenses committed. At the time of
the applicant’s discharge, AFR 39-17, paragraph 8, stated that when
discharged because of unfitness, an Undesirable Discharge (UD) will
be furnished. However, in 1959, AFR 39-17 was changed to state that
an airman discharged under this regulation should be furnished an
undesirable discharge, unless the particular circumstances in a given
case warrants a general or honorable discharge. Criteria for the
issuance of an undesirable, general, or honorable discharge is
outlined in paragraph 9, AFR 39-10 (See Exhibit D). Notwithstanding
the absence of error or injustice, the Board has the prerogative to
grant relief on the basis of clemency if so inclined.
Attached at Exhibit E is a memorandum prepared by the Air Force
Review Boards Agency Legal Advisor addressing the issue of
characterization of service and how standards have changed since
1959.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law
or regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of an error or an injustice. Based upon the presumption
of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs and without
evidence to the contrary, we must assume that the applicant's
discharge was proper and in compliance with appropriate directives.
We find no evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly
reviewing the documentation that has been submitted in support of
applicant's appeal, we do not believe he has suffered from an
injustice. 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-
2007-00727 in Executive Session on 14 June 2007, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. James W. Russell, III, Panel Chair
Ms. Glenda H. Scheiner, Member
Mr. Michael F. McGhee, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 May 07, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Excerpt, AFR 39-17, dated 9 Feb 54.
Exhibit D Excerpt, AFR 39-10, undated.
Exhibit E. Memo, AFBCMR Legal Advisor, dated 17 Apr 07.
JAMES W. RUSSELL, III
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01414
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01414 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable and his reenlistment code (RE) be changed to one that would allow him to enlist in the Army. The applicant appealed to the Discharge Review board (DRB) to...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00794
On 7 August 1961, the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records denied the applicants request to upgrade his discharge. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 11 April 1958, he was discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). Exhibit B.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04393
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04393 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. Examiners Note: The applicant has not shown the characterization of his discharge was contrary to the provisions of AFR 39-17A (unfitness) (extract copy of applicable portion attached as Exhibit D)....
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02411
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02411 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. The applicant responded to a request for post-service information and stated that he now has Alzheimers disease and cannot remember why he received an undesirable discharge. At the time of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04971
In response to the request, the applicant states that he is almost 81 years old and his friends and relatives are not aware of his undesirable discharge. His complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. At the time of the applicants discharge, AFR 39-17, paragraph 8, stated that when discharged because of unfitness, an Undesirable Discharge (UD) will be furnished. However, in 1959, AFR 39-17 was changed to state that an airman discharged under this regulation should be furnished...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03136
In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the applicants discharge on the basis of clemency; however, we found the evidence submitted insufficient to compel us to recommend granting the request on that basis. ________________________________________________________________ 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;...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01099
The applicant has not shown the characterization of his discharge was contrary to the provisions of AFR 39-10. Based on the evidence of record, we cannot conclude that clemency is warranted. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01101
The applicant has not shown the characterization of his discharge was contrary to the provisions of AFR 39-10. Attached at Exhibit D is a memorandum prepared by the Air Force Review Boards Agency Legal Advisor addressing the issue of characterization of service and how standards have changed since 1959. Based on the evidence of record, we cannot conclude that clemency is warranted.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00771
In addition, based on his overall record of service, the events which precipitated the discharge, and the contents of the FBI report, we are not persuaded that an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge is warranted on the basis of clemency. Exhibit B. Exhibit D. Air Force Regulation 39-17A.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02110
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. However, they concluded applicant’s discharge should be upgraded to general under honorable conditions, under the provisions of AFR 39-16 (See AFDRB Hearing Record at Exhibit B). Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit E. At the time of the applicant’s discharge, the...