RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02422
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable.
2. His narrative reason for separation of Misconduct-Civilian Conviction be changed.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He offers his sincerest apologies for the shame and embarrassment he caused to the great reputation of our military by his actions in a civil setting.
He states he is truly sorry and repentant for his actions against the individual parties involved in his case and against the State of Georgia. He offers a formal apology to all he has caused an offense and disappointment.
He was a young and foolish man who has been forever changed for the better through self-help and educational programs; all of which have become the foundation of his successful employment career, as well as the rest of his decision making processes.
He regrets his actions; however, he does not regret the consequences. He humbly asks for forgiveness, mercy, and clemency.
He has received a pardon from the State of Georgia and desires restoration of his firearms rights. He wants to leave his children and grandchildren a legacy.
In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of pardon documents, character letters, identification cards, newsletter extracts, a poem, and personal statements.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant entered the Regular Air Force on 2 Aug 78 and served for a period of 3 years, 11 months, and 10 days.
Records reveal that on 16 Jul 82, the applicant used a handgun to steal $29 from a 7-Eleven store in Macon, Georgia. On 27 Dec 82, he pled guilty and received a sentence of confinement to labor for a period of 20 years, ten of which was probated.
On 20 Jan 83, the applicants commander notified him of pending discharge action based on his civilian conviction. The applicant acknowledged receipt, consulted counsel, and waived his rights to a hearing before an administrative discharge board.
On 4 Feb 83, the staff judge advocate found the case legally sufficient and recommended discharge. The discharge authority concurred and the applicant was discharged on 10 Feb 83 with a UOTHC discharge.
On 8 Sep 10, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for a response within 30 days (Exhibit C). In response to the Boards request, he states he was incarcerated directly from his term of service and the two-year gap between 1982 and 1984 was inactive time awaiting trial, diagnostics, and placement.
He was able to use the available programs for education and rehabilitation. Any unaccounted time was spent working and enjoying time with his wife and family. He is still involved in ministry with his wife at their church and in three positions within prison, and is soon to be a certified chaplain.
The applicant's complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
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. After a thorough review of the evidence of record we see no evidence to show that the applicants discharge was erroneous or unjust. 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 he was entitled at the time of discharge. Nevertheless, in view of the applicant's apparent successful transition to civilian life, as evidenced by his pardon, the Board is of the opinion that upgrading his discharge to general (under honorable conditions) and his narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority, on the basis of clemency, is appropriate relief. Therefore, we recommend the records be corrected to the extent indicated below.
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 RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 10 February 1983, he was discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions), with the narrative reason for separation of Secretarial Authority.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2010-02422 in Executive Session on 4 November 2010, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 9 Jun 10, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 8 Sep 10.
Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 21 Sep 10, w/atchs.
Panel Chair
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant responded, indicating that nothing can change the facts or the past. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his general discharge should be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-1984-04083A
On 13 Oct 83, his commander recommended discharge. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant contends, as a diabetic herself, that her husband’s elevated blood sugar episode was not properly followed up by the Air Force. Review of service and DVA medical records through 1992 show no evidence of diabetes, and evaluation by DVA physicians also indicate no...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-1991-02293A
On 13 Oct 83, his commander recommended discharge. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant contends, as a diabetic herself, that her husband’s elevated blood sugar episode was not properly followed up by the Air Force. Review of service and DVA medical records through 1992 show no evidence of diabetes, and evaluation by DVA physicians also indicate no...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00071
On 11 Mar 82, the Airman Performance Report (APR) for the period 29 Jan 81 through 28 Jan 82, was referred to the applicant. Time lost for the following periods: 28-31 Oct 81, 15-16 Dec 81, 29 Jan- 1 Feb 82, 16-21 Feb 82, and 20 May 82-23 Sep 82. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF EVALUATION: A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 21 Jan 05 for...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03727
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03727 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be amended to correct the following errors: 1. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02402 ADDENDUM
His records since his discharge are clean. The applicants complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit H. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: We have thoroughly reviewed the evidence of record and considered the weight and relevance of the additional documentation provided by the applicant, and whether or not it was discoverable at the time of any previous application. Exhibit H. Letter, Applicant, 24 Sep 10, w/atchs.
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00689
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. In response, the applicant provides a statement describing his activities since his discharge as well as two letters in support of...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00632
___________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 24 Jul 81, for a period of six years in the grade of airman basic. Applicant was discharged on 29 Nov 83, in the grade of airman basic, under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Misconduct-Pattern Discreditable Involvement with Military or Civil Authorities, and received an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. We find no evidence of error in this case...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00462
The XXX TAW commander testified that he was not aware of any alcohol problems the applicant might have had, that the applicant had family and financial problems, and that while the applicant never told him he had an alcohol problem, it was possible he did have an alcohol problem. He testified the applicant never told him he had an alcohol problem. Diagnosis was probable alcohol abuse with a recommendation to the commander to refer the applicant again to Social Actions and, if retained, to...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00805
Several post-trial clemency evaluations were submitted and, while some recommendations were mixed, the majority recommended the trial recommendations of clemency be accepted. On 5 Dec 96, the applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (DRB). In the attached statement, the applicant indicates he would appreciate an upgrade to a general discharge if honorable was not possible.