RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00689
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be
upgraded.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His discharge was inequitable. He was not in a good mental
state because of a drug abuse problem and all of the long hours
he worked to fight and support the Central American war.
In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his
DD Forms 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active
Duty.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicants military personnel records indicate he enlisted
in the Regular Air Force on 10 Jul 81 as an airman basic (E-1)
for a period of four years and was progressively promoted to the
grade of airman first class (E-3), effective and with a date of
rank of 13 Aug 82.
On 14 Feb 83, the applicants commander preferred court-martial
charges against him for violating Article 128 of the Uniform
Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for assaulting a fellow airman
by stabbing him with a knife. The applicant subsequently
requested administrative discharge in lieu of trial by court-
martial. The case was found legally sufficient and the
discharge authority directed the applicants UOTHC discharge on
2 Mar 83.
On 14 Mar 83, the applicant was furnished a UOTHC discharge and
credited with one year, eight months, and five days of total
active service.
On 2 Aug 84, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB)
considered and denied the applicants request for an upgrade of
his discharge, concluding the discharge was consistent with the
procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge
regulation, was within the discretion of the discharge
authority, and he was provided full administrative due process.
Pursuant to the Boards request, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI) provided a copy of an Investigative Report,
which is at Exhibit C.
A copy of the FBI Report of Investigation and a request for
post-service information was forwarded to the applicant on
13 May 10. In response, the applicant provides a statement
describing his activities since his discharge as well as two
letters in support of his request (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. We took
notice of the applicants complete submission in judging the
merits of the case; however, we find no evidence of an error or
injustice. Based on the available evidence of record, it
appears the applicants UOTHC discharge in lieu of trial by
court-martial was consistent with the substantive requirements
of the discharge regulation and within the commanders
discretionary authority. Other than his own assertions, he has
provided no evidence which would lead us to believe otherwise.
We considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency;
however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to
convince us to recommend granting the relief sought on that
basis. In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of evidence
to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists for us to
recommend an upgrade to the applicants UOTHC discharge.
________________________________________________________________
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-2010-00689 in Executive Session on 14 Sep 10, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Forms 149, dated 15 Feb 10, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. FBI Report.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 13 May 10, w/atch.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 20 May 10, w/atchs.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03317
On 12 Jan 83, applicant’s squadron commander recommended his request for discharge be approved and recommended a general discharge. On 8 May 83, applicant applied to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his under other than honorable discharge be upgraded to an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. Exhibit C. AFDRB Hearing Record, dated 22 Oct 85, w/atchs.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03896
On 28 Jul 83, the base legal office reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient and recommended applicant’s unconditional waiver be accepted and that he be discharged with an under other than honorable conditions discharge without probation and rehabilitation. On 5 Aug 83, applicant was discharged in the grade of airman basic, under the provisions of AFR 39-10, for a pattern of misconduct - discreditable involvement with military or civil authorities, with an under other than...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01479
On 4 Jun 91, the applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to have his discharge upgraded; however, the AFDRB denied his application, concluding that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, was within the discretion of the discharge authority, and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. The applicant has provided no evidence which would lead us to believe the characterization...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02198
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02198 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 25 Nov 83, the applicant was discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions) in the grade of airman first class. On 2 Jul 84, the Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00330
DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00330 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His character of service be changed from general, under honorable conditions (UHC) to honorable. On 7 Aug 84, the applicant applied to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (DRB) to have his UOTHC discharge upgraded to honorable. In our view, the...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03875
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005- 03875 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 23 JUNE 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00865
The applicant was discharged on 12 Oct 84. 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 D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 14 Sep 10, w/atch.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02180
Applicant was separated from the Air Force on 27 August 1984 under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Administration Separation of Airman (request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial), with an UOTHC discharge. On 27 Aug 84, applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10, with a reason for separation of Request for discharge in lieu of Trial by Court-Martial, with service characterized as UOTHC. Exhibit B.
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01881
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-01881 INDEX CODE: A67.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded to Honorable. In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists to upgrade the applicant’s general...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03299
On 17 Jun 88, the separation authority approved the applicants unconditional waiver indicating he would be discharged in absentia at the earliest possible date. 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 BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the...