RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00647
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to
honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He messed up and let liquor get the best of him. He was a young
man away from home for the first time. He was homesick and
turned to drinking which he found hard to control. He was
removed from his career field and remanded to janitorial service.
Since he lost his career field, he asked to be discharged.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of
the United States, and copies of his DD Form 214, Armed Forces of
the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, with an
amendment.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force effective 18 May
1966 in the grade of airman basic. He was progressively promoted
to the grade of airman second class (E-3) effective 1 August
1967.
The applicant was arrested by civil authorities on or about
15 September 1967 for public drunkenness subsequent to being
involved in an affray. He pleaded guilty to the charge and was
given a 30-day suspended sentence for a period of 90 days. In
addition, he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR).
On 24 February 1968, he received Article 15 punishment for being
drunk and disorderly on station in violation of Article 134,
Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). He received punishment
consisting of forfeiture of $40 pay per month for two months and
being restricted to the base for a period of 60 days.
On 28 May 1968, the applicant was tried by Special Court-Martial
for being drunk and disorderly on station and for assaulting an
Air Policeman in the performance of his duties. As a result, the
applicant received punishment consisting forfeiture of $99 pay
per month for six months, reduction in grade to airman third
class (E-2), and restriction to the base for two months. The
convening authority subsequently modified the sentence to provide
for a forfeiture of $50 pay per month for six months.
On 23 August 1968, the applicant was notified of his commanders
intent to recommend him for a general (under honorable
conditions) discharge for frequent involvement of a discreditable
nature with civil or military authorities.
The applicant acknowledged his commanders intent and chose to
waive his rights to a hearing before an administrative discharge
board and to submit statements in his own behalf. In addition,
he indicated he did not desire probation as outlined in Air Force
Manuel (AFM) 39-12, Chapter 4.
On 13 September 1968, the Staff Judge Advocate found the case to
be legally sufficient. On 21 September 1968, the discharge
authority approved the recommended discharge and directed the
applicant be discharged with a general (under honorable
conditions) discharge without probation or rehabilitation under
the provisions of AFM 39-12, Chapter 2, Section B.
On 27 September 1968, the applicant was discharged with a general
(under honorable conditions) discharge. He served 2 year,
4 months, and 10 days on active duty.
Pursuant to the Boards request, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI), Clarksburg, WV, provided a copy of an
Investigation Report (Exhibit C).
On 25 April 2011, 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 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. Furthermore, we do not
find clemency is appropriate in this case since the applicant has
not provided any evidence concerning his post-service activities.
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 Docket Number BC-
2011-00647 in Executive Session on 20 October 2011, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Panel Chair
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection
with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-00647:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Feb 11.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. FBI Report.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 25 Apr 11, w/atch.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00228
On 1 October 1971, the Evaluation Officer recommended the applicant be separated from the Air Force with a general discharge as soon as possible. On 11 July 1973, the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) denied the applicant’s request that his general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge (Exhibit B). Although the applicant did not specifically request consideration based on clemency, we also find insufficient evidence to...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02049
Applicant was discharged on 26 Apr 73, in the grade of airman first class (E-3), under the provisions of AFM 39-12, Chapter 2, Section A, for Unsuitability, and was issued a general discharge. We conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02356
In support of the application, the applicant submits a copy of his separation document. 173992EA0, which is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant opines no change in the records is warranted. The BCMR Medical Consultant states a review of the records shows that the applicant’s commander based discharge on both unsuitability due to personality disorder and a pattern of misconduct.
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02864
In a legal review of the discharge case file, the staff judge advocate found it legally sufficient and recommended that he be discharged from the Air Force with a general discharge and concurred with the evaluation officer that the applicant not be considered for probation and rehabilitation. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Nov 07. Exhibit E. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Nov 07, w/atch.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03208 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. In a legal review of the discharge case file, the staff judge advocate found it legally sufficient and recommended that the applicant be discharged from the...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04282
On 5 March 1970, the applicant was discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge after completing a period of 1 year, 4 months and 13 days total active service. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINED THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-01005
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-01005 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04476
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04476 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 16 Jun 92, the applicant was notified of his commanders intent to recommend he be discharged from the Air Force for a pattern of misconduct. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00874
It appears that prior to any legal action being taken by civilian authorities, the applicant was advised by his section commander that if he received a suspended sentence for the civilian offense of grand larceny for allegedly stripping an automobile, the Air Force would not impose any further punishment. It appears that he has had a clean record since that time. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 May 03.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01797
On 11 February 1988, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending him for discharge from the Air Force (AF) under the provisions of Air Force Regulation (AFR) 39-10 for misconduct (conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline.) The discharge authority approved the discharge and directed the applicant be discharged with a general discharge without probation and rehabilitation. The applicant has not shown the characterization of his discharge was contrary to the...