RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01841
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be
upgraded to honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was discharged because his bank account was overdrawn for a
small amount of $20. He does not feel this was justification
for discharge.
He is not applying for benefits, but rather to feel better about
himself and the time served in the Air Force.
In support of his request, the applicant provides a DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of
the United States.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant entered the Regular Air Force on 12 Oct 59.
Available records reflect the applicant was notified of pending
discharge action on 2 Mar 62. Specifically, the commander cited
frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military
authorities and an established pattern of dishonorably failing
to pay just debts as the bases for discharge.
The applicant consulted counsel, waived his rights to a board
hearing and to submit statements in his own behalf.
The applicants misconduct included a Special Court Martial, for
wrongful appropriation of government equipment, an Article 15, Record of Nonjudicial Punishment, for disobeying a lawful order,
driving with an expired base registration, speeding, multiple
instances of failing to pay debts, and appearance and attitude
infractions.
The staff judge advocate found the discharge legally sufficient,
and on 14 Mar 63, the discharge authority directed discharge.
The applicant was discharged with a UOTHC discharge on 4 Apr 62.
Pursuant to the Boards request, the Federal Bureau of
Investigations (FBI), states they were unable to identify an
arrest record on the basis of the information furnished. A
request for post-service information was forwarded to the
applicant on 8 Sep 10 for a response within 30 days (Exhibit C).
As of this date, not 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 Docket Number
BC-2010-01841 in Executive Session on 23 November 2010, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 Apr 10, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 8 Sep 10.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00571
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00571 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. 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...
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-2008-02640
Applicant was discharged on 1 Dec 65. To date, no response has been received (Exhibit D). Exhibit D Letter, AFBCMR, dated 2 Dec 08.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02362
On 27 Mar 86, the applicant submitted a letter to his commander requesting he be considered for an honorable discharge. On 10 Apr 86, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge in the grade AB. 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.
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03284
We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-03284 in Executive Session on 18 Nov...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01628
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-01628 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be corrected as follows: 1. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00683
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00683 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 9 Mar 84, he was furnished a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge and credited with 18 years, 1 month, and 16 days of total active service. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-03529
The Board has been advised that it can consider cases involving potential claims by more than one spouse or former spouse if there is evidence that the member or former spouse timely notified the Government within one year after the divorce was final, or if there are extraordinary circumstances that would justify correction of the record. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force which is at...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02979
He was discharged on 1 May 85. 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 30 Sep 10, w/atch.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03619
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03619 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to Honorable. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to compel us to...