RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02855
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded
to honorable.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Pertinent issues pertaining to his case were never addressed; he
has no convictions, and there was just an agreement offered with
prejudice without counsel.
The applicants complete submission is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicants military personnel records indicate he enlisted
in the Army on 30 Apr 70.
On 10 Jun 70, the applicant was furnished a general (under
honorable conditions) discharge for unsuitability and was
credited with 1 month and 11 days of total active service.
On 24 Aug 70, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force.
On 22 Oct 71, summary court-martial charges were preferred
against the applicant for three specifications of assault, in
violation of Article 128, Uniform Code of Military Justice
(UCMJ).
On 6 Nov 71, the applicant requested discharge in lieu of court-
martial for the good of the service.
On 17 Nov 71, the request for discharge was reviewed and
determined to be legally sufficient and, on 1 Dec 71, was
approved by the Numbered Air Force (NAF) Commander.
On 9 Dec 71, the applicant was furnished an under other than
honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge and was credited with
1 year, 3 months, and 16 days of total active service.
On 1 Jun 77, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB)
approved the applicants request to upgrade his UOTHC discharge
to a general (under honorable conditions) discharge, indicating
abuse of alcohol may have contributed to the applicants
misconduct. The Board concluded the evidence presented was
sufficiently credible enough to substantiate upgrading the
discharge to a general discharge; however, his misconduct and
substandard performance did not warrant an Honorable discharge.
On 18 Sep 78, the AFDRB denied the applicants request to
upgrade his general discharge to an honorable discharge,
indicating the discharge was consistent with the procedural and
substantive requirements of the discharge regulations and was
within the sound discretion of the discharge authority. The
Board concluded that during the applicants brief period of
service, he made little contribution to his units mission and
his performance was deemed unsatisfactory and did not warrant
upgrading the discharge.
On 27 Feb 14, a request for post-service information was
forwarded to applicant for comment within 30 days. As of this
date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C).
________________________________________________________________
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 an error or injustice. We took
notice of the applicants complete submission in judging the
merits of the case; however, we are not persuaded that
corrective action is warranted. While the Air Force Discharge
Review Board was compelled to upgrade the applicants under
other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge to general
(under honorable conditions) discharge, we find no basis to
recommend a further upgrade of the applicants discharge
characterization to fully honorable. In this respect, we note
that this Board, in the interest of justice, can recommend the
upgrade of a discharge based on clemency when an applicant has
brought forth evidence of personal contributions to society
since his or her discharge that are so substantial that they
overcome the misconduct for which he or she was discharged.
However, having no such showing in this case, we find no basis
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 this
application.
________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2013-02855 in Executive Session on 27 Mar 14, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 7 Jun 13.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records
Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 27 Feb 14, w/atch.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00141
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00141 INDEX CODES: 108.00, 121.02, 123.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect that he is entitled to payment for lost time from 24 Nov 70 to 4 Feb 71 and six (6) days of forfeited accrued leave. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-02783
On 10 Dec 70, the Air Force Military Personnel Center (AFMPC) reviewed the case and recommended disapproval stating there was insufficient justification to support a waiver of the one year ADSC. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00056
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00056 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 8 May 2006 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. They concluded that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01508
On 22 Dec 88, the applicant was discharged for Misconduct Drug Abuse with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions) in the grade of airman. On 14 Oct 93, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicants appeal for upgrade of her discharge to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04716
The wing commander reviewed the case and recommended the 21 AF/CC approve the applicants request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial and ordered that he be discharged with an UOTHC discharge. According to AFHQ Form 0-2077, Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) Hearing Record dated 6 Jun 13, the applicant was offered, but declined, a personal appearance before the board and requested that the review be completed based on the available service record. The AFDRB noted that if...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01588
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01588 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 30 Apr 71, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge in the grade of airman first class. After thoroughly...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00887
On 12 Oct 71, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) reviewed the applicants request to upgrade his discharge, but denied the request because the facts of record in his case did not warrant changing the type of discharge. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists to upgrade the applicants Undesirable discharge. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR...
3 AFBCMR 96- 01136 Therefore, if the AFBCMR overturns his court-martial action, he would only be entitled to have his former grade of airman reinstated with an effective date and date of rank of 3 May 72. Concerning the applicant's request that his court- martial conviction be overturned, we note that 10 USC 1552(f) limits this Board to correction of a record to reflect actions taken by the reviewing official and action on the sentence of a court-martial for the purpose of clemency. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05603
Before recommending discharge the commander noted he reviewed the applicants records. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge on the basis of clemency; however, after considering his overall record of service, the infractions which led to his administrative separation and the lack of post-service information we are not persuaded that an upgrade is warranted on that basis. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01102
On 23 Jan 96, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied the applicants request for an upgrade of his UOTHC discharge to honorable. In reviewing the applicant's claim, there must be evidence that an error or injustice occurred with the characterization of the involuntary separation due to a medical reason. The complete BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE...