Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-05403
Original file (BC-2012-05403.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-05403
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED: NO

	 

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general discharge be upgraded to honorable.

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He apologizes for his mistakes while serving in the Air Force.  
At the time, he was young and very immature.  After being 
discharged he married and has three wonderful girls.  He has 
been married for 48 years, is a home builder, and has made a 
good life for his family.  He is a good citizen and has matured.  

In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of a 
Request Pertaining to Military Records, a copy of his DD Form 
214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or 
Discharge, and a personal statement.

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

________________________________________________________________
_

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted into the Regular Air Force on 5 Jan 55.  
On 8 May 58, he received a summary court-martial for being 
disorderly in quarters.   On 27 Jun 58, the applicant was 
discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-16 (Unsuitability) for 
having a negative attitude towards duty performance and 
authority.  He received a general discharge after serving 
3 years, 5 months, and 23 days on active duty.

At the time of the applicant’s discharge, AFR 39-17, paragraph 
8, stated that when discharged because of unfitness, an 
Undesirable Discharge (UD) will be furnished.  However, in 1959, 
AFR 39-17 was changed to state that an airman discharged under 
this regulation should be furnished an undesirable discharge, 
unless the particular circumstances in a given case warrants a 
general or honorable discharge. Criteria for the issuance of an 
undesirable, general, or honorable discharge is outlined in 
paragraph 9, AFR 39-10.  

A memorandum was prepared by the Air Force Review Boards Agency 
Legal Advisor addressing the issue of characterization of 
service and how standards have changed since 1959, for 
informational purposes.

________________________________________________________________
_


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.  After careful 
consideration of the available evidence, we found no indication 
the actions taken to effect his discharge were improper or 
contrary to the provisions of the governing regulations in 
effect at the time, or the actions taken against the applicant 
were based on factors other than his own misconduct.  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 discharge based 
on clemency; however, based on the evidence before us, we find 
no basis to grant clemency at this time.  

________________________________________________________________
_

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-2012-05403 in Executive Session on 1 Aug 13, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence for Docket Number 2012-05403 
was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 16 Nov 12, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.





                                   
                                   Panel Chair









Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04393

    Original file (BC-2012-04393.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04393 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. Examiner’s Note: The applicant has not shown the characterization of his discharge was contrary to the provisions of AFR 39-17A (unfitness) (extract copy of applicable portion attached as Exhibit D)....

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02240

    Original file (BC-2007-02240.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 23 Jun 58, the Air Force Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for a discharge upgrade. Considered alone, we conclude the discharge proceedings were proper and the characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances. Therefore, the Board Majority recommends the applicant’s discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions) as a matter of equity and on the basis of clemency.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02411

    Original file (BC 2013 02411.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02411 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. The applicant responded to a request for post-service information and stated that he now has Alzheimer’s disease and cannot remember why he received an undesirable discharge. At the time of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00365

    Original file (BC-2004-00365.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    His punishment consisted of reduction in grade to the rank of airman basic with an effective date and date of rank of 8 Sep 58. The discharge authority approved an undesirable discharge and directed that the applicant be issued a DD Form 258AF, “Undesirable Discharge Certificate.” On 27 Mar 59, applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-17, with service characterized as under other than honorable conditions. At that time, the applicant was also invited to provide additional...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03136

    Original file (BC 2013 03136.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the applicant’s discharge on the basis of clemency; however, we found the evidence submitted insufficient to compel us to recommend granting the request on that basis. ________________________________________________________________ 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;...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00727

    Original file (BC-2007-00727.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00727 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general, under honorable conditions (UHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The applicant has not shown the characterization of his discharge was contrary to the provisions of AFR 39-17, Unfitness, (Exhibit C). ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04971

    Original file (BC-2012-04971.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In response to the request, the applicant states that he is almost 81 years old and his friends and relatives are not aware of his undesirable discharge. His complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. At the time of the applicant’s discharge, AFR 39-17, paragraph 8, stated that when discharged because of unfitness, an Undesirable Discharge (UD) will be furnished. However, in 1959, AFR 39-17 was changed to state that an airman discharged under this regulation should be furnished...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04261

    Original file (BC-2012-04261.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04261 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00771

    Original file (BC-2007-00771.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, based on his overall record of service, the events which precipitated the discharge, and the contents of the FBI report, we are not persuaded that an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge is warranted on the basis of clemency. Exhibit B. Exhibit D. Air Force Regulation 39-17A.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02817

    Original file (BC-2003-02817.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommended upgrading the discharge to general (under honorable conditions) due to the lack of documentation to support the reasons leading to the applicant’s discharge, if a search of the FBI file reveals no convictions. We note the recommendation from the Air Force; however, based on the limited documentation pertaining to the reason for his separation, the majority of the Board does not...