RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00131
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded
to an honorable discharge.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was told that after six months his discharge would be
upgraded to honorable.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on
2 May 73.
On 13 Sep 77, the applicants commander notified him that he was
recommending his discharge for the Good of the Service in Lieu
of Court-Martial, AFM 39-12, Paragraph 2-78. The reasons for
this action were four violations of Article 134, Uniform Code of
Military Justice; specifically four specifications of marijuana
use.
On 13 Sept 77, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the action
and waived his rights to consult with legal counsel or submit
statements on his own behalf.
On 22 Sep 77, the case was found legally sufficient.
On 21 Sep 77, the discharge authority concurred with the
commanders recommendation and directed the applicant be
furnished a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.
On 29 Sep 77, the applicant was furnished a general discharge
and was credited with 4 years, 4 months, and 28 days of active
service.
On 28 Apr 14, a request for post-service information was
forwarded to the applicant for review and 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 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, due to the applicants failure to provide
information regarding his post-service activities, we cannot
conclude that such consideration is warranted. 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-2014-00131 in Executive Session on 21 Nov 14, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2014-00131 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 31 Dec 13.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, 28 Apr 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00131
On 12 Jan 78, the applicant amended his original conditional waiver and waived his rights associated with an administrative discharge board hearing contingent on his receipt of no less than a general discharge. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Feb 06. Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 7 Feb 06.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03910
The Board should find it in the interest of justice to consider his untimely application because the reason he waited so long to submit his application is because he was ashamed. We took notice of the applicants complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03450
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03450 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C). In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, in the absence of any evidence related to the applicants...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01628
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-01628 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be corrected as follows: 1. In response to the Board’s request, the FBI indicated that on the basis of the data furnished they were unable to identify with an...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-03681
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03681 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded. On 29 Aug 77, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied a similar request by the applicant. _________________________________________________________________ THE...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 03681
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03681 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded. On 29 Aug 77, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied a similar request by the applicant. _________________________________________________________________ THE...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00917
The applicants master personnel records reflect a DD Form 214, was issued for the period 22 Apr 91 and 10 Sep 91. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/DPTS recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. A complete copy of the ARPC/DPTS evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01696
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01696 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On 28 Jan 14, the applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to have his discharge upgraded to Honorable. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however,...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02638
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02638 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient for us to conclude that the applicants post-service activities overcome the misconduct for...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00855
On 14 Dec 83, the applicant received an UOHTC discharge, and was credited with 9 years, 8 months and 17 days of active service. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the characterization of the applicants discharge based on 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. Exhibit C. Clemency Information...