RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-00779
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to
general.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Prior to his reenlistment in 1972, he was exposed to Agent Orange.
He was in good health upon his entry into the Air Force; however, since his
exposure to Agent Orange, he has had major health issues.
He deeply regrets the circumstances that led to his discharge and is very
sorry for his conduct towards the Air Force.
The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant entered the Regular Air Force on 4 Dec 69 and served for a
period of 5 years, 7 months, and 15 days.
On 6 Sep 74, the applicant received an Article 15, Record of Nonjudicial
Punishment, for possessing marijuana, Methaqualone, and Methylphenidate
(Ritalin). He received a suspended reduction in grade to airman first
class.
On 28 Mar 75, the applicant received an Article 15, for disposing of
personal property which was acquired through tax-free or duty free U.S.
Government appropriated facilities without prior written approval. He was
ordered to forfeit $108 and reduced in grade to airman first class.
On 18 Jul 75, he was discharged with a UOTHC discharge.
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
states they were unable to identify an arrest record based on the
information furnished (Exhibit C).
On 17 Apr 08, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the
applicant for response within 30 days (Exhibit D). In response to the
request, the applicant provided statements in his own behalf. The
applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________
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 careful consideration of the
available evidence, we find no impropriety in the characterization of
applicant’s 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 the
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 the characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the
existing circumstances. We noted the submission of a personal statement in
his own behalf but do not feel the personal statement is sufficient enough
evidence in and of itself to cause us to consider granting his request
based on clemency. However, if he provides additional information such as
that outlined in the Post-Service Information Bulletin, we may reconsider
upgrading his discharge on the basis of clemency. In the meantime and in
view of the above we find no basis to warrant favorable action on this
application.
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 issues 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-2008-00779
in Executive Session on 11 June 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
Mr. Steven A. Cantrell, Member
Mr. Michael J. Novel, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 17 Feb 08.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Negative FBI Report.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR w/atch, dated 17 Apr 08.
Exhibit E. Applicant’s Rebuttal, dated 2 May 08.
CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00785
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-00785 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions discharge (UOTHC) be upgraded to a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, not dated. Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 30 Apr 08.
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-02800
On 22 March 1985, the applicant was discharged in the grade of airman first class (E-3) for misconduct – civilian conviction, with a general service characterization. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00492
Capt M started court-martial proceedings against him. Although he has no proof, he feels his discharge was based on the ill-feelings Capt M had towards him. The applicant submitted a similar application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his discharge be upgraded to honorable.
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-01420
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-01420 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NOT INDICATED HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His discharge be upgraded from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. We conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-03129
On 4 April 1986, the applicant was discharged in the grade of airman first class (E-3) for misconduct – drug abuse, with a general service characterization. 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 members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2008-03129 in Executive Session on 29 October 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-01583
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was addicted to marijuana for many years of his life. 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. Exhibit F. Applicant’s Letter, dated 26 Jun 08, w/atchs.
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-02668
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS At the time he was disciplined, he requested that he be discharged and was subsequently rendered a general discharge. The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2008-02668 in Executive Session on 16 December 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-02911
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS The incident which precipitated the action was a gang fight on 29 July 1964 involving the applicant, another airman, and five civilian youths. The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2008-02911 in Executive Session on 29 October 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00692
He served four years on active duty with 106 days lost time. We also considered upgrading his discharge based on clemency; however, noting his apparent misconduct following his discharge as indicated on the FBI report, we do not believe a recommendation that the characterization of his discharge be upgraded on that basis is warranted. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Available Master Personnel Records.
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2005-01223-2
There is material error and injustice involved for not only himself, but hundreds of other Air Force personnel who served on the ground in Laos, but whose individual personnel records do not reflect the location of their service. c. It is an injustice that the Board relies on the individual personnel records since those records do not reflect service in Laos where Agent Orange was used. If his records did not show service in Vietnam the DVA would have denied his claim.