RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03302
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to
honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The applicant provides no contentions for his request other than
he became a United States citizen on 15 June 1964 and his mother
worked for the Presidio Food Service for 28 years.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of his DD
Form 214, Report of Separation from Active Duty, general
discharge certificate, High School Diploma of Graduation,
Certificate of Naturalization, and a San Francisco Police
Department notification of incident memorandum.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who
entered active duty on 10 August 1964 and was promoted to the
grade of airman third class (E-2) with a date of rank of
4 October 1964.
Between September 1965 and August 1966, the applicant received
three Article 15 punishments; twice for failing to obey a lawful
order and once for being disorderly in station. His punishments
consisted of reduction in grade to airman basic (E-1),
correctional custody for 30 days, and forfeiture of $46 per month
for two months. In addition, he received a Letter of Reprimand
for conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline and was
placed on the control roster for showing irresponsibility in
conduct. As a result, he received a referral performance report
for the period 10 August 1965 through 6 April 1966.
On 11 April 1966, the applicant was notified of his commanders
intent to recommend he be discharged for frequent involvement of
a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities. The
applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification and elected to
waive his right to a hearing before a board of officers and his
right to submit a statement in his own behalf. On 11 May 1966,
the discharge authority approved the applicants discharge under
the provisions of Air Force Regulation 39-17 with an undesirable
discharge. On 16 May 1966, the applicant was discharged with an
under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge. He
served one year, nine months, and seven days on active duty.
On 4 April 1978, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB)
reviewed and upgraded the applicants characterization of
discharge to general (under honorable conditions).
Pursuant to the Boards request, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI), Clarksburg, WV, provided a copy of an
Investigation Report (Exhibit C).
On 27 October 2010, the applicant was given an opportunity to
submit comments about his post service activities and in response
to the FBI Report (Exhibit D). As of this date, this office has
received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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 note that on
4 April 1978, the AFDRB upgraded the applicants UOTHC discharge
to a general (under honorable conditions). After reviewing his
recent submission, we find that a further upgrade is not
warranted. The applicant has provided insufficient evidence to
use as a basis to further upgrade his characterization of service
based on the merits of the case or on clemency. The
characterization of service previously upgraded by the AFDRB was
not contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation,
unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses committed.
Therefore, based on the foregoing, we find no basis to recommend
granting the relief sought in this application.
________________________________________________________________
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-2010-03302 in Executive Session on 16 June 2011, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2010-03302 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 7 Sep 10, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. FBI Report.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 27 Oct 10, w/atch.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00873
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00873 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 17 February 1971, applicant submitted an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his discharge be upgraded to honorable....
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04758
During his discharge processing he was informed that he would receive a general discharge; however, he received a UOTHC discharge. On 20 October 1966, the applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to recommend that he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFM 39-12. Accordingly the Board recommends that his records be corrected as indicated below.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00277
The discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority. Furthermore, the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00811
On 1 March 1974, the applicant was discharged from active duty with an UOTHC discharge. He served 3 years, 6 months, and 28 days on active duty. On 25 February 1975 and 5 May 1978, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicants requests to upgrade his characterization of discharge.
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01499
On 7 March 1977, after consulting with counsel, the applicant filed her request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Air Force Manual 39-12, Chapter 2, Section F. She indicated that if her request for discharge was approved, she understood it may result in her receiving a UOTHC discharge. On 23 March 1978 and 8 December 1980, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicants request to upgrade her discharge. Furthermore,...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00731
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00731 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, be corrected to reflect his honorable discharge. According to the Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC), they issued an Honorable Discharge Certificate (contained in the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00028
On 30 January 1964, he appeared before a board of officers and the findings and recommendation was to separate him with an under other than honorable conditions (undesirable) discharge. The base legal services reviewed the report from the board of officers and found it legally sufficient to support the findings and recommendation to discharge him with an under other than honorable conditions (undesirable) discharge. On 8 April 1964, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00064
In response to the FBI report, the applicant submits a personal statement, a copy of a Final Discharge order issued by the State of Utah, and an additional personal statement that restates his request, which are at Exhibit H. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to...
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 | CY2009 | BC-2008-02911
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS The incident which precipitated the action was a gang fight on 29 July 1964 involving the applicant, another airman, and five civilian youths. The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2008-02911 in Executive Session on 29 October 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: