Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-01875
Original file (BC-2009-01875.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2009-01875
            INDEX CODE:  110.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NOT INDICATED

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  general  (under  honorable  conditions)  discharge   be   upgraded   to
honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

When he enlisted in military service, he was young, could not read  and  had
no guidance or direction of what he  really  wanted  to  do.   His  military
training was adequate but he had more freedom than  he  could  handle.   His
job performance was good and  he  always  accomplished  his  duties  without
problems.  He was well-liked by his peers and supervisors.  It would  be  an
honor for him to have his discharge upgraded to honorable  for  the  service
he extended to his country.

In  support  of  this  application,  the  applicant  submits  his   personal
statement, a letter of recommendation, a letter of appreciation, and his  DD
Form  214,  Armed  Forces  of  the  United  States  Report  of  Transfer  or
Discharge.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 9 Aug 67 for a period  of
four years.  His highest grade achieved was airman  first  class,  effective
and with a date of rank of 1 Jun 69.

On 31 Aug 70, his commander  notified  him  that  he  was  recommending  his
separation from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-12, Chapter  2,
para 2-15a  for  unfitness.   His  reasons  were  the  applicant’s  frequent
involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities.   Following
is an account of the applicant’s infractions:

      1)  On 16 Sep 69, he received an Article 15 for Failure to Repair.

      2)  On 4 Feb 70, he received an Article 15 for Failure to Repair

      3)  On 21 Aug 70, he received an Article 15 for being derelict in  the
performance of his duties.

On 1 Oct 70, the discharge authority  approved  the  recommended  discharge.
On 8 Oct 70, he was discharged with a general (under  honorable  conditions)
character of service and issued a general  discharge  certificate.   He  had
served three years and two months on active duty.

In response to the Board’s request, the FBI indicated that on the  basis  of
the data furnished they were unable to identify with an arrest record.

On 23 Nov 09, a request for post-service information was  forwarded  to  the
applicant for response within 30  days.   To  date,  no  response  has  been
received.

_________________________________________________________________

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.

_________________________________________________________________

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  BC-2009-01875  in
Executive Session on 12 Jan 2010, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Panel Chair
      Member
      Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 Jun 09 w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 23 Nov 09, w/atch.




                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00870

    Original file (BC-2009-00870.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-00870 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. DPSS states changes on prior service personnel are allowed if the data in question was recorded in error by the Air Force at the time of enlistment or during the enlistment. Furthermore, the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01588

    Original file (BC-2011-01588.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01588 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 30 Apr 71, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge in the grade of airman first class. After thoroughly...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02845

    Original file (BC-2007-02845.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02845 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. On 23 Oct 80, applicant applied to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting that his BCD be upgraded to an honorable...

  • 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 | CY2009 | BC-2009-01300

    Original file (BC-2009-01300.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was awarded the National Defense Service Medal and the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award. The complete DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant submitted a copy of his individual flight record dated 31 Jan 70 which indicates he flew a total of 15 combat sortie flights between 29 Jul 69 and 01 Sep 69. _________________________________________________________________ THE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02588

    Original file (BC-2012-02588.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His records do not reflect two tours of duty in Vietnam and Southeast Asia. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPAPP recommends denial of the applicant’s request for credit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02694

    Original file (BC 2014 02694.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02694 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded. f. On 24 Jun 72, the applicant received an Article 15 for failure to repair, forfeited $25 pay and 16 days extra duty. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00464

    Original file (BC-2003-00464.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his request, the applicant submits a copy of his DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States. On 20 Oct 70, the applicant received notification that he was being recommended for discharge for unfitness. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice;...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02864

    Original file (BC-2007-02864.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In a legal review of the discharge case file, the staff judge advocate found it legally sufficient and recommended that he be discharged from the Air Force with a general discharge and concurred with the evaluation officer that the applicant not be considered for probation and rehabilitation. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Nov 07. Exhibit E. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Nov 07, w/atch.