RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03484
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be
upgraded to honorable.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His discharge was unjust because of his first-sergeants
alcoholism, which resulted in him being assigned excessive
duties and erroneous punishments. He was the base commanders
aid and the sergeant was very jealous of his position. He is
trying to receive medical benefits from the Department of
Veterans Affairs (DVA).
The applicants complete submission is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force, on 15 Oct 59,
for a period of four years.
On 24 Oct 60, the squadron commander notified the applicant of
administrative discharge action for unfitness. The specific
reasons for the proposed action were: (1) apathetic performance
(2) apathetic response to meeting his financial responsibilities
and (3) apparent character and behavior disorders.
The applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFM 39-17, Discharge of Airmen Because of Unfitness, on 9 Dec 60, with
service characterized as undesirable. He was credited with
1 year, 1 month and 21 days of active duty service.
Pursuant to the Boards request, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, indicated they are
unable to locate an arrest record based on the data furnished.
________________________________________________________________
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 during the discharge process. 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. Considering the
applicants service, the seriousness of the offenses which led
to his administrative separation, and the lack of post service
information since leaving the service, we are not persuaded that
an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge is warranted
on the basis of clemency. 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 AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2011-03484 in Executive Session on 12 June 2012, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 2 Sep 11.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03484
Applicant asserts that the Military Personnel Flight (MPF) failed to provide adequate counseling regarding an authorized Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB). We took notice of the applicant's 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 their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. The applicant’s Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03094
On 20 Dec 72, the base legal office reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support the action On 22 Dec 72, the applicant was furnished a general (under honorable conditions) discharge in accordance with AFM 39-12, Separation for Unsuitability, Misconduct, Resignation, or Request for Discharge for the Good of the Service and Procedures for the Rehabilitation Program, for Apathetic Behavior and Defective Attitude. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03484
The HQ AFPC/DPPPR evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 23 April 2004 for review and response. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that he was...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03484
He was subsequently promoted to the grade of first lieutenant, and was released from active duty in that grade on 28 November 1945. In addition, given the unlikelihood of success on the merits, they strongly recommend the Board find it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay, and recommend that the Board deny the application as untimely. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00222
On 17 Dec 1989, the applicant submitted a request to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) for an upgrade to his discharge. 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 recommend granting the relief sought on that basis. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04500
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04500 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be changed to a medical discharge. In consideration of the appeal for a medical discharge, the reviewer must evaluate whether a medical or mental health condition was unfitting at the time of...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-03007
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He believes that his time in service including his previous five years of honorable service demonstrates that his discharge was rather harsh punishment for the trivial matter that occurred during his last enlistment. On 1 March 1960, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend him for discharge from the Air Force under the provisions of Air Force Regulation (AFR) 39-16. After...
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 | CY2014 | BC 2014 00370
In addition, his CO explained he would not get a replacement if he transferred him, so he would be a cook. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 13 Jan 1964. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to recommend granting relief on that basis.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00578
On or about 19 Feb 59, the applicant, without proper authority, failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty. For this misconduct, he received restriction to the base for 14 days. On 4 Nov 60, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge in the grade of airman basic.