RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02878
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His undesirable discharge be upgraded.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
At the time he was discharged, he didnt realize what type of
discharge it was and just accepted it. He now believes he didnt
deserve an undesirable discharge. His discharge should be
upgraded because he served honorably and has been a good citizen.
He pays his taxes and helps others when they need help. He has a
clean record since leaving the service over sixty years ago.
The applicants complete submission is at Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicants military personnel records are not available in
Automated Records Management System (ARMS), or at the National
Military Processing Center (NPRC), and no record was provided by
the applicant.
On 30 Jun 50, according to information provided by the applicant,
he was furnished an undesirable discharge.
On 1 Aug 14, a request for post-service information was forwarded
to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. As of
this date, no response has been received by this office
(Exhibit B).
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 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
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-2014-02878 in Executive Session on 25 Mar 15 under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Jun 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Aug 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02694
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02694 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded. f. On 24 Jun 72, the applicant received an Article 15 for failure to repair, forfeited $25 pay and 16 days extra duty. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02222
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who entered active duty on 1 June 1982 and was promoted to the grade of airman (E-2) with a date of rank of 1 December 1982. The applicant responded by stating he had developed an alcohol drinking problem while in the service, but didnt realize it at the time. ________________________________________________________________ The following members...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02061
On 27 Oct 87, the case was found legally sufficient and, on 4 Nov 87, the discharge authority directed the applicant be discharged. 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. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 4 Aug 14, w/atchs.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03316
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03316 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgrade to a General discharge. The applicant waived any right to a hearing before an administrative discharge board, and was notified of his right to legal counsel and to submit statements on his own behalf. Based on the available evidence of record,...
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 | CY2012 | BC-2012-03925
The applicants complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR) which are attached at Exhibits C and D. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. The RE Code of 2C is required based on the ELS...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00573
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00573 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to General. 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. While we note the applicants...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02393
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02393 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. Considering the applicants overall record of service, we are not persuaded that an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge is warranted on the basis of clemency. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Jun 14, w/atch.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00897
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility, which are attached at Exhibits C and D. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFC recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPFC evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the applicants request for award of...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02773
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: AFPC/DPFFF recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. As of this date, no response has been received by this office. The Board would be willing to reconsider her request upon receipt of the applicants affidavit stating she did not receive the...