RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02986 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a general (under 
honorable conditions) discharge. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He regrets his actions as a foolish young man and hanging around 
with the wrong crowd. 

 

He is in poor health and needs medical care from the Department 
of Veterans Affairs (DVA). 

 

The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The available records reflect the applicant served in the Air 
Force from 10 Jan 56 to 6 Jun 58. 

 

On 20 Feb 58, the applicant was tried by Special Court-Martial 
for two specifications of larceny for stealing between $20 and 
$50 from a local business. He pled guilty and was sentenced to 
a BCD, forfeiture of $50 per month for six months, and six 
months of confinement to hard labor. 

 

On 28 Mar 58, the convening authority approved a sentence of a 
BCD, forfeiture of $39 per month for four months, and 
confinement to hard labor for four months. 

 

On 20 May 58, the applicant’s discharge was ordered to be 
executed. On 6 Jun 58, he was discharged with a BCD. 

 

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of 
Investigations (FBI), Clarksburg, West Virginia, states they 
were unable to identify an arrest record on the basis of the 
information furnished. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

 


AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial. JAJM states the applicant’s 
record of trial no longer exists; however after reviewing the 
documents submitted, it appears that his conviction and sentence 
are legally sufficient and there was no error in the processing 
of his court-martial noted by the review process in place at the 
time. 

 

Additionally, clemency would be unfair to those individuals who 
honorably served their country while in uniform. Congress’ 
intent in setting up the Veterans’ Benefits Program was to 
express thanks for veterans’ personal sacrifices, separation 
from family, facing hostile enemy action, and suffering 
financial hardships. It would be offensive to all those who 
served honorably to extend the same benefits to someone who 
committed crimes such as the applicant’s while on active duty. 

 

The complete JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 5 Nov 10 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit D). As of this date, this office has not received a 
response. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 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 or injustice. We also find 
insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the 
discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency. 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 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 
submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered 
with this application. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number 
BC-2010-02986 in Executive Session on 12 April 2011, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Aug 10. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 1 Nov 10. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Nov 10.