RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04177
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her husbands discharge of under other than honorable conditions
(UOTHC) be upgraded.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The deceased former member was wrongfully discharged and should
have his character of discharge changed.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
According to the deceased former member's military personnel
records, he initially entered the Regular Air Force on 30 Aug
55.
On 20 Oct 58, the deceased former member was furnished an
undesirable discharge for misconduct. The records show that
during the applicant's service he received two summary court-
martials, was confined at hard labor for one month as a result
of the conviction of refusing to obey a lawful order, and for
the second court-martial he was confined at hard labor for
20 days for being off limits in a known house of prostitution.
He was further punished by being restricted to the limits of the
base for 14 days for creating a disturbance in a private
establishment.
On 15 Sep 14, a request for post-service information was
forwarded to the deceased former member's spouse for review and
response 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 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. In the interest of
justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on
clemency; however, in the absence of any evidence related to the
applicants post-service activities, there is no way for us to
determine if the applicants accomplishments since leaving the
service warrant such action. Therefore, in the absence of
evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting
the relief sought.
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-2013-04177 in Executive Session on 21 Nov 14, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Panel Chair
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2013-04177 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 Aug 13, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 15 Sep 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02691
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02691 COUNSEL: NONE (DECEASED FORMER MEMBER) HEARING DESIRED: NO (APPLICANT) ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His deceased fathers record be corrected to reflect he was retroactively awarded the following awards: a. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01546
On 29 May 86, 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. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit F). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02072
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02072 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her deceased husbands Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). 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. Exhibit C....
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01539
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. While the deceased member was a POW from 31 Jan 45 to 29 Apr 45, the applicant did not submit documentation which verifies the deceased...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02937
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The deceased former member never was awarded or presented those decorations/medals/ribbons/commemoratives listed on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. 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 and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the applicants request...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02190
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report, which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS believes the 25 Sep 57 general discharge was consistent with the discharge regulation in effect at the time and within the discretion of the discharge authority. They believe the...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02805
At the time of his passing he was eligible for benefits under the Post 9/11 GI Bill and had he elected to transfer his education benefits, he would not have incurred any additional service requirement. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. There are no provisions under the laws that govern the transfer of education benefits for service members who...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02478
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. According to the War Department Adjutant Generals Office, Report of Death, dated 21 Feb 45, the deceased former service member was...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02023
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02023 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 20 Sep 62, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force. On 9 Sep 65, the...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02704
She did not even know about the divorce until her husband passed away. If neither the member nor the former spouse requests the election change during the one-year eligibility period, former spouse coverage may not be established thereafter. Further, the divorce decree she provided did not include language that would entitle her to former spouse SBP coverage.