RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03347
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded
to honorable.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His discharge should have been upgraded because in the 1970s
the President and the government upgraded all military status
(character of service), except dishonorable. He did not request
his upgrade at that time because he thought his was good enough.
He needs his discharge upgraded so that he can apply for
insurance (auto, health, and life) through United States
Automobile Association (USAA). He states in order to get
insurance through USAA his discharge characterization of service
has to be honorable.
The applicants complete submission is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 11 Jun 64, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force
for a period of four years.
On 30 Nov 65, the squadron commander notified the applicant of
administrative discharge action for a pattern of misconduct.
For a full list of the offenses, please see the commanders
notification letter at Exhibit B. After consulting with an
evaluation officer, the applicant waived his right to submit
statements in his own behalf. The staff judge advocate found
the case file legally sufficient and recommended the applicant
receive a general discharge. On 13 Dec 65, the discharge
authority approved the general discharge.
On 16 Dec 65, the applicant was discharged with service
characterized as general (under honorable conditions). He was
credited with one year, six months and one day of active duty
service.
________________________________________________________________
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, unduly harsh, or
disproportionate to the offenses committed. In the interest of
justice we considered upgrading the characterization of
applicants discharge based on clemency; however, after
considering his overall record of service, the numerous
infractions which led to his administrative separation and the
lack of post-service documentation, we are not persuaded that an
upgrade on this basis is warranted. Should the applicant
provide evidence pertaining to his post-service activities, we
would be willing to reconsider his request. 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 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-2012-03347 in Executive Session on 18 Apr 13, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Jul 12.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01890
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01890 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFM 39-17, Discharge of Airmen Because of Unfitness, on 6 May 60, with service characterized as undesirable. We took...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02218
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02218 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable. He was credited with 3 years, 4 months and 25 days of active service. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to recommend granting...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04305
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04305 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00156
On 13 Sep 67, the evaluation officer recommended to the Air Base Group Commander that the applicant be discharged and issued a general discharge. On 22 Sep 67, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge, without probation and rehabilitation. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03610
Since inception of the additional insurance program in October 2001, additional money has been deducted from his pay for the additional coverage for her. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02036
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02036 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 4 Jan 1989, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force, with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). In the interest of justice, we considered...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2001-00580A
The applicant’s complete review is at Exhibit K. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL HQ USAF/JAA EVALUATION: HQ USAF/JAA reiterates that the applicant’s original debt of $50,669.90 was reduced to $25,669.90 and, to the extent that his reconsideration request was for the repayment of this validly established debt owed to the US, it should be denied. DFAS summarizes the applicant’s indebtedness and adjustments thereto as follows: $50,669.90 Original...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-02640
Applicant was discharged on 1 Dec 65. To date, no response has been received (Exhibit D). Exhibit D Letter, AFBCMR, dated 2 Dec 08.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01587
4) He received seven (7) Records of Individual Counseling, three for failure to go, three for failure to conform to AFR 35-10, Dress and Personal Appearance of Air Force Personnel standards, and one for failure to attend required training. On 11 Apr 94, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen, by reason of misconduct, and received a general discharge. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-1999-03347
The majority of the Board finds insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency. The applicant’s UOTHC discharge may have been appropriate for the circumstances at the time. JOE G. LINEBERGER Director Air Force Review Boards Agency AFBCMR BC-1999-03347 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552,...