ADDENDUM
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00039
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded
to honorable.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 21 June 2011, the Board considered and denied a similar
request. For an accounting of the facts surrounding his
previous request and the rationale of the Boards earlier
decision, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit E (with
Exhibits A thru D).
In the original request, the applicant was given 30 days in
which to provide post-service information, however, his
documentation was not received until after the board had already
concluded and rendered its decision.
By letter, the applicant responded to the 12 May 2011, request
for post-service information. He states his first two and a
half years in the Air Force went very well. After completing
basic military training (BMT), he received his first stripe to
the grade of airman third class. His first duty station was
Ladd Air Force Base (AFB), Fairbanks, Alaska, where he was a
crash fire fighter and was very proud of it. He was promoted to
driver of a crash truck while in Alaska, however, promotion to
the grade of airman second class kept passing him by and he did
not know why because he thought he was good airman. Always on
time for work, doing his job well and not causing any problems.
The misconduct which led to his discharge was due to his choice
of hanging out with the wrong group of guys. They would drink
too much and spend a lot of time with their girlfriends. After
being discharged from the Air Force in 1962, he went home to
live with his parents until he found a job working for the Twin
City Transit Lines Bus Company. During that time, he married
and had a daughter.
In 1966, he moved his family to Los Angeles, CA, where he became
an apprentice carpenter with four years of schooling and on-the-
job training. He stayed with his trade for over 30 years, the
work was hard but it paid well for an uneducated person.
For the last 50 years, he has kept his military discharge secret
from his friends and relatives with the exception of his
previous wife and daughter.
In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of a
personal statement, a character reference statement from the
United Brotherhood of Carpenters Local Union Number 409 and a
letter from his daughter.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments is at
Exhibit F.
_______________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
After a thorough review of the evidence of record, we see no
evidence to show that the applicants discharge was erroneous or
unjust. We have thoroughly reviewed the circumstances
surrounding the applicant's discharge and we find no impropriety
in the characterization of his service. Notwithstanding the
above, consideration by this Board, is not limited to the events
which precipitated the discharge. We may base our decision on
matters of equity and clemency rather than simply on whether
rules and regulations which existed at the time were followed.
Under our broader mandate and after careful consideration of all
the facts and circumstances of the applicant's case, we are
persuaded that corrective action is appropriate on the basis of
clemency. Since it has been over 49 years since his discharge
and it appears he has led a productive and stable life, we
believe it would be an injustice for him to continue to suffer
from the adverse effects of the general discharge. Therefore,
we believe that on the basis of clemency the applicants
discharge should be upgraded to honorable.
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to the APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on
4 October 1961, he was discharged under the provisions of AFR
39-10, paragraph 1-2, (Secretarial Authority) with Separation
Program Designator (SPD) Code KFF, with service characterized as
honorable.
________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2011-00039 in Executive Session on 11 July 2011, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Panel Chair
Member
Member
All members voted to correct the records as recommended. The
following additional documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit E. Record of Proceedings, dated 24 June 2011,
w/exhibits A through D.
Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atchs.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00039
Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the applicant’s general discharge for minor disciplinary infractions was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the commander’s discretionary authority. 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 discharge. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02634
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02634 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge be upgraded. In cases which include guilty pleas, the military judge will ensure the accused understands the meaning and effect of his plea and the maximum punishment that could be imposed if his guilty plea is accepted by...
AF | DRB | CY2007 | FD2006-00151
The records indicated the applicant received two Article 15s, two Letters of Reprimand, and one Record of Individual Counseling for misconduct. time in the Air Force, my job performance, and taking into account the many challenges that I had faced during my time of service. She also stressed that if I was discharged, then it should be nothing less than an Honorable discharge based on my overall job performance during the four years that I served.
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.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04214
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04214 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge be upgraded to general under honorable conditions. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. Exhibit B.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03557
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: On 7 January 1999 he was married while in the process of transferring between duty stations: Kunsan Air Base (AB), South Korea, to Hill Air Force Base (AFB), Utah. We took note of his complete submission in judging the merits of this case and while we support the Discharge Review Board’s act of clemency in upgrading his discharge, we are not persuaded he has suffered either an error or...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00039
Between February and September 1961, the applicant was counseled six times; three for failing to report for duty on time, once for failing to keep his room in inspection order, and twice for failing to report for duty. On 4 October 1961, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge in the grade of airman basic. We have considered the applicants overall record of service, the events which precipitated the discharge, and the contents...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00862 INDEX NUMBER: 110.00 XXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable. The complete response is at Exhibit F. In her third letter, the applicant indicates that while detained during the discharge...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01569
Applicant believes with all of the support documentation in his case, he is a very valuable asset to the Air Force In support of his appeal, applicant submitted a personal statement; extracts from his military personnel record, including copies of his performance reports and AF IMT 418s, along with several letters of character reference. Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. Applicant’s commander concurred and denied his reenlistment.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-01034
Had the squadron followed through with the AmnM processing, the former commander would have seen and approved the awards. One of the approved citations actually states "voluntary risk of life," which is what all of their original citations read before citations were changed to the AFCM for “acts of courage.” The AFI states that the AmnM will not be awarded for "normal performance of duties." Exhibit H. Letter, Applicant, dated 12 Dec 2012, w/atch.