RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00277
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be
upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was young when he joined the Air Force and knew it was the
right place for him. He was caught playing a joke on government
equipment and was court-martialed and sent to Japan. He does
realize he was wrong and he is not the same person now. He has
some health issues and would like to apply to the Department of
Veterans Affairs (DVA).
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on
22 August 1951.
On 25 September 1953, the applicant was tried by special court-
martial on the charge of absenting himself from his organization
from on or about 13 July 1953 to 25 August 1953, in violation of
Article 86, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). He pled
guilty and was found guilty. The applicant was sentenced by a
military judge to hard labor without confinement for 45 days and
forfeiture of $30.00 of his pay.
On 28 May 1954, the applicant was tried by special court-martial
on the charge of wrongfully and unlawfully making two prints in
the likeness of a United States Silver Certificate in the
denomination of five dollars in violation of Article 134, UCMJ.
He pled not guilty and was found guilty. The applicant was
sentenced by a military judge to reduction to the grade of
Airman Basic, confinement at hard labor for six months, and
forfeiture of $25.00 per month for a like period.
On 26 October 1956, the applicant was discharged Under Other
Than Honorable Conditions under the provisions of AFR 39-10,
Administrative Separation of Airmen, and was credited with 4
years, 9 months, and 27 days of active service, excluding lost
time of 128 days from 13 July 1953 to 25 August 1953 and 10 June
1954 to 1 September 1954. A copy of the applicants
administrative discharge package is not available; therefore,
the circumstances surrounding his discharge could not be
verified.
On 28 April 2014, 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. The
applicants records do not include a copy of the administrative
discharge package; however, based on the presumption of
regularity in government affairs, absent evidence to the
contrary, it must be presumed that the administrative discharge
was carried out in accordance the substantive requirements of
the discharge regulation in effect at the time and was 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 are
sufficiently meritorious to overcome the misconduct for which he
was discharged. 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-2014-00277 in Executive Session on 2 December 2014,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 23 Dec 13, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, 28 Apr 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC 2007 04042
On 17 January 1955, following the Judge Advocates finding that the case was legally sufficient, the discharge authority approved the applicants discharge under the provision of AFR 39-17 and directed he be discharged with an undesirable discharge. He was credited with 1 year, 5 months and 13 days of active duty with 380 days lost time. Exhibit B.
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00763
On 25 February 1954, the Air Force Board of Review approved the findings and sentence as adjudged. Specifically, Section 1552(f)(1) permits the correction of a record to reflect actions taken by reviewing authorities under the UCMJ. Furthermore, we do not find clemency is appropriate in this case since the applicant has failed to provide any evidence concerning his post-service activities.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03258
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03258 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He would like his discharge characterization upgraded in order to gain access to Department of Veteran Affairs (DVA) medical benefits. As a result, he received punishment consisting of a bad conduct discharge, forfeiture of $70 pay per month for one...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03596
On 23 June 1957, he was honorably discharged and on 24 June 1957, reenlisted in the RegAF for a period of four years. In an application, dated 13 August 1972, he requested his discharge be upgraded to one under honorable conditions. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that at the time of his discharge on 13 August 1959, he was...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03194
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03194 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. He had completed a total of 1 year, 1 month and 17 days and was serving in the grade of airman basic at the time of discharge. ROBERT S. BOYD Panel Chair AFBCMR...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-1999-01111
The BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the applicant has not submitted any material or documentation to show that he was unfit due to a physical disability at the time of his discharge. The AFPC/DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00047
On 25 Feb 60, applicant received a Letter of Counseling (LOC) for consuming alcohol within six hours of duty. On 9 Mar 60, the applicant submitted a letter to his commander requesting a discharge that outlined his reasons as to why he no longer wished to be in the Air Force. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 28 Apr 14.
From 25 July 1952 to 13 August 1952, he was charged with Absent Without Leave (AWOL). On 28 May 1954, the Air Force Discharge Review Board reviewed and denied applicant’s request that his discharge be upgraded. The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 15 July 2002, a letter was forwarded to applicant suggesting that the applicant consider providing evidence pertaining to his...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03923
In support of her request, the applicant has submitted a copy of her late husband’s death certificate, and a copy of a letter from the National Personnel Records Center dated 12 November 2003. Applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors in the discharge processing, nor provide facts that support upgrading the discharge to honorable (Exhibit C). Novel, Panel Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Nov 03, with attachments.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05521
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05521 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be removed. On 10 July 1981, the applicant was tried by special court- martial for: a. one specification of wrongful transfer of marijuana on or about 12 September 1980, in violation of Article 134, Uniform Code of...