RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00361 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was young and stupid when he made a mistake at the time of his discharge. He told his dad before his death that he would try to get his discharge upgraded and become a member of the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW). He is very sorry for his family’s disgrace; he has a great wife and family and is ashamed of what he did. He really liked his job as a jet engine mechanic and is very proud to have served in the Air Force. The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 11 Jan 66 for a period of four years. The squadron commander initiated administrative discharge action against the applicant, on 16 Sep 68, for frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with civil and military authorities. The specific reasons for the proposed action were: a. He was issued a ticket by security forces, on 31 Jan 67, for parking illegally within a designated fire lane. b. He was cited by Security forces, on 15 May 67, for wearing his field jacket with no chevrons, fatigue shirt out of his trousers and failure to have his AF Form 1199, USAF Entry Control Card displayed. c. He was charged on 24 Jan 68 with speeding 36 miles per hour in a 25 mile per hour zone, failure to have his ADC Decal properly displayed and excessive speed from start. d. A ticket was issued, on 6 Feb 68, for parking illegally in a lane and completely blocking the flow of traffic. e. He was cited on 3 Jul 68 for illegally parking on the shoulder. f. Michigan State Police cited him on 20 Apr 68 after his vehicle struck a utility pole causing injury to himself and his passenger. He was fined $50 by a civilian court. g. He was charged with larceny of $213.50 on 19 Jun 68. A Special Court-Martial found the applicant guilty of wrongful appropriation. He was sentenced with a reduction in grade to airman (Amn/E-2), forfeiture of $50 per month for four months, and restriction to the limits of the base for two months. h. The city police apprehended the applicant at a jewelry store and charged him with larceny of a ring valued at over $100. He was fined $100 plus $13.35 for court costs. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification and on 1 Oct 68, after consulting with counsel and having been advised of his rights, he waived his rights associated with an administrative discharge board hearing and submitted statements in his own behalf. On 15 Oct 68, the discharge authority approved the UOTHC discharge without P&R. The applicant was discharged on 25 Oct 68 under the provisions of AFM 39-12, by reason of misconduct – pattern of discreditable involvement with military or civil authorities, with service characterized as under other than honorable conditions. He was credited with two years, nine months, and 15 days of active duty service. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. On 7 Apr 10, a copy of the FBI report was forwarded to the applicant for comment. At that time, he was also invited to provide additional evidence pertaining to his activities since leaving the service (Exhibit D). In his statement, the applicant indicated that he would like his honorable discharge restored. He is a very hard worker with experience in various occupations. He has never been fired or even reprimanded in any of his jobs. He further summarized the events of his life since leaving the Air Force. His many accomplishments, activities he has volunteered for, organizations he belongs to, and faithful dedication to his family. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides several letters of character reference from friends, co-workers, and associates. The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ 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. The applicant provided a personal statement and letters of character reference in support of his appeal to have his discharge upgraded based on clemency; however, considering his overall record of service, the numerous offenses which led to his administrative separation, and the FBI Report of Investigation, we are not persuaded that an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge is warranted. Therefore, 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-2009-00361 in Executive Session on 15 June 2010, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 Jan 10, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. FBI Report of Investigation. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 7 Apr 10, w/atchs. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, 30 Apr 10, w/atchs.