Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-05072
Original file (BC-2012-05072.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-05072
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED: NO

	 
________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general (under honorable conditions (UHC)) discharge be 
upgraded to honorable.

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Under a program that allowed soldiers who helped around a farm, 
he was discharged early.  His parents owned a farm and he 
qualified for early discharge.  He did not pay attention to his 
discharge status when he got out and feels that he deserves an 
honorable discharge.

In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his 
Discharge Certificate.

His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. 

________________________________________________________________
_

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted into the Regular Air Force on 2 Apr 54.  
The applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-16 
for not being able to absorb the concepts of military life.  
Additionally, he went to an off-limits establishment; misused a 
government vehicle; delayed reporting an accident.  He received 
2 Article 15s and met a summary court-martial.  He was confined 
for 30 days and forfeited $55.00.  On 16 Dec 55, he received a 
UHC discharge after serving 1 year, 7 months, and 21 days on 
active duty.







On 19 Jun 13, a request for information pertaining to his post-
service activities was forwarded to the applicant for response 
within 15 days.  As of this date, no response received.

________________________________________________________________
_

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, or unduly harsh.  In the 
interest of justice, we considered upgrading the applicant’s 
discharge on the basis of clemency, however, there was no 
evidence submitted to compel us to recommend granting the 
request on that basis.  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-2012-05072 in Executive Session on 23 Jul 13, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence for Docket Number 2012-05072 
was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 Oct 12, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 19 Jun 13, w/atch.




                                   
                                   Panel Chair





Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00018

    Original file (BC-2012-00018.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 23 Sep 1971, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force, with a general (under honorable conditions) 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 BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01160

    Original file (BC-2012-01160.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 24 May 1972, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force, with a service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 25 Sep 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC- 2012-01160: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 22 Mar 2012, w/atch. Exhibit B.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00330

    Original file (BC-2012-00330.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00330 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His character of service be changed from general, under honorable conditions (UHC) to honorable. On 7 Aug 84, the applicant applied to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (DRB) to have his UOTHC discharge upgraded to honorable. In our view, the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04283

    Original file (BC-2012-04283.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    His Report of Individual Counseling (RIC), dated 3 Aug 06, be removed from his records. The complete SGH evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSIM recommends denying the applicant’s request to remove the RIC from his Personnel Information File (PIF) since the PIF became obsolete when the applicant separated from the Air Force. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02576

    Original file (BC-2012-02576.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    In response to our request, applicant provided post-service information, which is attached at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice with regard to the applicant’s request to have his general (UHC) discharged upgraded to honorable. Consequently, the majority of the Board believes that his narrative reason should be changed...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03906

    Original file (BC-2012-03906.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In response to our request, applicant provided post-service information, which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. 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. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, the applicant...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00913

    Original file (BC-2012-00913.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The Post 9/11 GI Bill Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) was not conveyed in a timely manner before his retirement date. However, based on the applicant's complete submission and his available military records, we find no evidence of an error or injustice. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-05564

    Original file (BC-2012-05564.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05564 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions (UHC)) 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-05756

    Original file (BC-2012-05756.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He served honorably throughout his time in the service. He received two LORs and two Article 15s for his actions. The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He requests a personal hearing before the Board at his own personal expense because he truly feels that an injustice has been done by not upgrading his discharge.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 05669

    Original file (BC 2012 05669.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists to grant the relief sought in this application. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-05669 in Executive Session on 19 Sep 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-05669 was considered: Exhibit A. DD...