RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05023
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be
upgraded to an Honorable discharge.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He should never have received a UOTHC discharge without the Air
Force considering the impact on his wife and children. The
reason he received this discharge was that he was in debt, but
only three months before being discharged he received his second
good conduct medal. He was given a choice of a court martial or
an undesirable discharge and he took the discharge. He is now
79 years old and wants the Air Force to hear his side of the
story. After leaving the Air Force, he had a great life and a
great family. He went to work for Lockheed Aircraft and other
aircraft companies, deployed on more than one occasion to
Vietnam as a tech rep and supervisor, worked for United Space
Alliance on the space shuttle, and retired at the end of a
successful career. In all that time his employers never made
him feel like he was undesirable. Since he left the Air Force
he has proven what type of a man he is.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
At the time of the incident in question, the applicant was
serving as a Staff Sergeant in the Air Force.
On 11 Sep 59, the applicants commander notified him he was
recommending him for an undesirable discharge for gross
financial mismanagement and irresponsibility. The applicant was
notified of his right to a board hearing, legal counsel, and to
submit statements on his own behalf.
On 18 Sep 59, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the action
and waived his rights to a board hearing, legal counsel, and to
submit statements.
On 28 Sep 59, the applicants commander recommended him for
discharge, and on 16 Oct 59 the discharge authority directed the
applicant receive an undesirable discharge.
On 17 Nov 59, the applicant received a UOTHC discharge and was
credited with after 7 years, 7 months, and 15 days of total
active service.
On 4 Jun 13, a request for post-service information was
forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within
30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this
office (Exhibit D).
________________________________________________________________
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 applicants complete submission in judging the merits of
the case; however, we do not find the documentation presented
sufficient to conclude the applicant has been the victim of an
error or injustice. We find no evidence of an error or
injustice that occurred in the discharge process. It appears
the applicants UOTHC discharge was consistent with the
substantive requirements of the discharge regulation in effect
at the time and within the commanders discretionary authority.
No evidence has been presented to indicate otherwise. In the
interest of justice, we considered upgrading his discharge on
the basis of clemency; however, other than his own assertions
concerning his successful career after leaving the Air Force,
the applicant provided no character references or documentation
for us to consider in determining whether his post-service
accomplishments were sufficient to overcome the misconduct that
formed the basis of the discharge. Therefore, in the absence of
evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists for
us to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of material 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 the
application.
________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2012-05023 in Executive Session on 18 Jul 13, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Panel Chair
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 Oct 12, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 4 Jun 13, w/atch.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01820
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01820 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions) or honorable. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03376
On 11 Dec 59 and 18 Oct 78, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request that his discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02393
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02393 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. Considering the applicants overall record of service, we are not persuaded that an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge is warranted on the basis of clemency. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Jun 14, w/atch.
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03533
74 dated 15 Jul 49 and the applicant was discharged from the Air Force on 15 Jul 49 with an undesirable discharge. In response to the Board’s request, the FBI indicated they were unable to identify with an arrest record pertaining to the applicant on the basis of information furnished (Exhibit C). To date, no response has been received (Exhibit D).
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04560
In support of his request, the applicant provides a personal statement, copies of his referral OPR and rebuttal, FEB Findings and Recommendations and various other documents associated with his request. Air Force policy is that an evaluation report is accurate as written when it becomes a matter of record. The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C. _____________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 2 Sep 14, a copy of the Air...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03484
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. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00571
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00571 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02856
Therefore, he was not eligible for promotion to airman until that date. He is granted a waiver and is eligible to reenlist in the Regular Air Force. He is granted a waiver and is eligible to reenlist in the Regular Air Force.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02023
He was credited with 1 year, 4 months, and 18 days of active duty service (excludes 126 days lost time due to being AWOL, extra duty and confinement). The applicant was properly evaluated for evidence of mental illness at the time of his discharge and none was found. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00799
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C, D, E, and F. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of the applicants request to remove the LOR. Rather, as an administrative action, the standard of proof for an LOR (and referral OPR) is a preponderance of the evidence; i.e., that it is more likely than not that the fact occurred as...