RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03941
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be
upgraded.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His wife was having problems and he felt that he had to take care
of her. He states he wrote a letter to the Air Force explaining
the situation and that he would return.
The applicants complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 14 December
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. The specific reasons were as follows:
a. On three different occasions the applicant did between
23 May 1967 and 4 August 1967 receive non-judicial punishment
under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)
for failing to go to his appointed place of duty.
b. On or about 1 September 1967, the applicant did without
proper authority absent himself from his organization and
remained absent until 30 October 1967. For this misconduct he
was tried and found guilty by a Special Court-Martial.
c. On or about 22 November 1967, the applicant did without
proper authority absent himself from his organization and
remained absent until 28 November 1967. For this misconduct he
was tried and found guilty by a Special Court-Martial.
He was advised of his rights in this matter and elected to
present his case before an administrative discharge board and he
also elected not to submit a statement on his own behalf. The
administrative discharge board recommended discharge without
consideration for probation and rehabilitation.
The discharge authority concurred with the recommendation and
directed the applicant be discharged. The applicant was
discharged on 2 May 1968 with an under other than honorable
conditions (UOTHC) discharge. He served 11 months and 22 days on
active duty. His dates of time lost consisted of 1 September
1967 to 29 October 1967 and 22 November 1967 to 18 February 1968.
On 17 April 2013, a request for information pertaining to his
post-service activities was forwarded to the applicant for review
and response within 30 days (Exhibit C). 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, unduly harsh, or
disproportionate to the offenses committed. 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 the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice; the
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2012-03941 in Executive Session on 30 May 2013, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2012-03941 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 3 August 2012.
Exhibit B. Applicants Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 17 April 2013.
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00613
On 11 March 2008, the Board staff requested the applicant provide documentation pertaining to his post-service activities, within 30 days (Exhibit C). 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 following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00852
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. Additionally, due to the lack of evidence of a successful post-service adjustment, we do not find it would be in the interest of justice to upgrade his discharge on the basis of clemency. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03941
As stated in the ACP guidelines, his eligibility date rendered him ineligible to complete an entire period of agreement under the policy as released. We took notice of the applicant's complete 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 its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant was ineligible for the Aviator Continuation Pay Program during Fiscal Year...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-02717
Since being discharged from the Air Force he has worked diligently to better his life and he is a productive citizen in his community. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. The applicant’s time in military service was about two years, and a little less than half of that time was spent either AWOL or in confinement.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03436
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03436 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded to an Honorable discharge. He has lived with and paid for this one mistake for 40 years of his life. Specifically, section 1522(f)(1) permits the correction of a record to reflect...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02831
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02831 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. On 20 March 1969, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00277
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00277 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 26 October 1956, the applicant was discharged Under Other Than Honorable Conditions under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen, and was credited with 4 years, 9 months, and 27 days of active service,...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04304
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04304 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to an honorable or medical discharge. The discharge authority concurred with the recommendation and directed an UOTHC discharge. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 2 April 2013.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04743
He served in the Air Force to the best of his ability and had a good service record. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented sufficient to compel us to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis. Exhibit C. FBI Report, dated 7 Mar 2012.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05097
A complete copy of the SAF/MRBP evaluation is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reiterates his argument that he would have been selected for promotion to master sergeant if credited with the Air Medal. As for the applicants request that he be promoted to the grade of master sergeant (E-7), in view of the fact that we have determined there is no basis to recommend granting the AM, we find...