RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00361 

 INDEX CODE: 110.02 

 

 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be 
upgraded to honorable. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He was young and stupid when he made a mistake at the time of 
his discharge. He told his dad before his death that he would 
try to get his discharge upgraded and become a member of the 
Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW). He is very sorry for his 
family’s disgrace; he has a great wife and family and is ashamed 
of what he did. He really liked his job as a jet engine 
mechanic and is very proud to have served in the Air Force. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 11 Jan 66 for 
a period of four years. 

 

The squadron commander initiated administrative discharge action 
against the applicant, on 16 Sep 68, for frequent involvement of 
a discreditable nature with civil and military authorities. The 
specific reasons for the proposed action were: 

 

 a. He was issued a ticket by security forces, on 
31 Jan 67, for parking illegally within a designated fire lane. 

 

 b. He was cited by Security forces, on 15 May 67, for 
wearing his field jacket with no chevrons, fatigue shirt out of 
his trousers and failure to have his AF Form 1199, USAF Entry 
Control Card displayed. 

 

 c. He was charged on 24 Jan 68 with speeding 36 miles per 
hour in a 25 mile per hour zone, failure to have his ADC Decal 
properly displayed and excessive speed from start. 


 

 d. A ticket was issued, on 6 Feb 68, for parking illegally 
in a lane and completely blocking the flow of traffic. 

 

 e. He was cited on 3 Jul 68 for illegally parking on the 
shoulder. 

 

 f. Michigan State Police cited him on 20 Apr 68 after his 
vehicle struck a utility pole causing injury to himself and his 
passenger. He was fined $50 by a civilian court. 

 

 g. He was charged with larceny of $213.50 on 19 Jun 68. A 
Special Court-Martial found the applicant guilty of wrongful 
appropriation. He was sentenced with a reduction in grade to 
airman (Amn/E-2), forfeiture of $50 per month for four months, 
and restriction to the limits of the base for two months. 

 

 h. The city police apprehended the applicant at a jewelry 
store and charged him with larceny of a ring valued at over 
$100. He was fined $100 plus $13.35 for court costs. 

 

The applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification 
and on 1 Oct 68, after consulting with counsel and having been 
advised of his rights, he waived his rights associated with an 
administrative discharge board hearing and submitted statements 
in his own behalf. On 15 Oct 68, the discharge authority 
approved the UOTHC discharge without P&R. 

 

The applicant was discharged on 25 Oct 68 under the provisions 
of AFM 39-12, by reason of misconduct – pattern of discreditable 
involvement with military or civil authorities, with service 
characterized as under other than honorable conditions. He was 
credited with two years, nine months, and 15 days of active duty 
service. 

 

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an 
investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. 

 

On 7 Apr 10, a copy of the FBI report was forwarded to the 
applicant for comment. At that time, he was also invited to 
provide additional evidence pertaining to his activities since 
leaving the service (Exhibit D). 

 

In his statement, the applicant indicated that he would like his 
honorable discharge restored. He is a very hard worker with 
experience in various occupations. He has never been fired or 
even reprimanded in any of his jobs. He further summarized the 
events of his life since leaving the Air Force. His many 
accomplishments, activities he has volunteered for, 
organizations he belongs to, and faithful dedication to his 
family. 

 


In support of his appeal, the applicant provides several letters 
of character reference from friends, co-workers, and associates. 

 

The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, 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 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 during the discharge process. 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. The applicant 
provided a personal statement and letters of character reference 
in support of his appeal to have his discharge upgraded based on 
clemency; however, considering his overall record of service, 
the numerous offenses which led to his administrative 
separation, and the FBI Report of Investigation, we are not 
persuaded that an upgrade of the characterization of his 
discharge is warranted. 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 the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2009-00361 in Executive Session on 15 June 2010, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 Jan 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. FBI Report of Investigation. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 7 Apr 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, 30 Apr 10, w/atchs. 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair