AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
KhsCUKU Ut' YKVCLEUINGS
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NO: 98-00815
.An. 3 3 $J@
my
HEARING DESIRED: NO
Applicant requests that his
general. Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A.
undesirable discharge be upgraded to
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request
and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the
application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinion was
forwarded to counsel for review and response (Exhibit D). As of
this date, no response has been received by this office.
After careful consideration of applicant's request and the
available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of
error or injustice to warrant corrective action. The facts and
opinions stated in the advisory opinion appear to be based on the
evidence of record and have not been rebutted by counsel. Absent
persuasive evidence applicant was denied rights to which
entitled, appropriate regulations were not followed, or
appropriate standards were not applied, we find no basis to
disturb the existing record.
Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.
The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision.
Applicant should also be informed that this decision is final and
will only be reconsidered upon the presentation of new relevant
evidence which was not reasonably available at the time the
application was filed.
Members of the Board, Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Mr. Terry A.
Yonkers, and Mr. Joseph G. Diamond considered this application on
10 November 1998, in accordance with the provisions of Air Force
Instruction 36-2603, and the governing statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552,
CHARLENE M. BRADLEY /
Panel Chair
Exhibits :
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinion
D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
DEPARTMENT O F THE A I R FORCE
HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE P E R S O N N E L CENTER
RANDOLPH AIR FORCE BASE TEXAS
JUL 3 0 7998
MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR
FROM: HQ AFPCDPPRS
550 C Street West Ste 11
Randolph AFB TX 78150-4713
The applicant, while serving in the grade of airman first class, was discharged fiom the Air
Force 24 Oct 55 under the provisions of AFR 35-66 (Admitted Homosexual) with an undesirable
discharge. He served 03 years 03 months 11 days total active service.
Requested Action. The applicant is requesting an upgrade of his character of discharge to
general. He claims he was inappropriately issued an undesirable discharge stating that the others
involved were not subordinate to him..
Facts. The applicant’s commander recommended involuntary discharge be taken against the
applicant for admitted homosexuality. In a medical certificate dated 20 Sep 55, the medical
facility reported the applicant freely admitted that he had about 12 episodes of homosexual
behavior during Jun and Jul of 1954. In addition, he did have homosexual behavior prior to his
military service. On 11 Oct 55, applicant submitted an application for discharge under AFR 35-66
(Homosexuality) and indicated in his application that he understood that he was entitled to an
impartial hearing by a board of officer; call witnesses in his own behalf. Applicant waived his
entitlement to appear before the board and requested discharge without benefit of a board
proceeding. He fbrther indicate that he understood that if his request to separate was approved
his separation may be under conditions other than honorable and that he may receive an
undesirable discharge. Legal counsel was made available to him. The case was processed to the
discharge authority and on 17 Oct 55 the discharge authority directed the applicant be discharge
with an undesirable discharge.
Discussion. This case has been reviewed for separation processing and there are no errors or
irregularities causing an injustice to the applicant. The discharge complies with directives in effect
at the time of his discharge. The character of the discharge was appropriate as supported by the
evidence of record. Applicant admitted to having homosexual acts with at least two subordinate
airmen in the grade of A3C (E-2) of which one was age 19 and the other was age 18 and the
applicant was an A1C (E-4) that was 23 years of age.
Recommendation. Applicant did not submit any new evidence or identifjl any error in the
discharge processing nor provide facts which warrant an upgrade of the discharge he received
over 40 years ago. He has not filed a timely request.
JOHN C. WOOTEN, DAF
Military Personnel Mgmt Spec
Separations Branch
Dir of Personnel Program Management
Accordingly, we find that corrective action is appropriate as a matter of equity and on the basis of clemency and recommend the discharge be upgraded to honorable. Exhibit B. CHARLENE M. BRADLEY Panel Chair AFBCMR 99-01084 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that: The pertinent military...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00510
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00510 IN THE MATTER OF: COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable based on the repeal of Title 10, United States Code (USC), Section 654, more commonly known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01955
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01955 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His discharge be updated to Honorable. The guidance stated requests to change the RE code to 1J should be granted for members separated under DADT unless there was misconduct present. In a memorandum, dated 20 Sep 11, the Under Secretary of Defense published guidance that Service Discharge Review Boards should...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02349
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02349 INDEX CODE: 100.06 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be changed to honorable and his narrative reason for separation be changed. We considered applicant’s request for a change in the reason for separation, however, as noted by...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01568
The Board found that the applicant did commit an act of homosexuality and recommended he be discharged from the Air Force with a general discharge. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 8 December 1955, he was discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). JOE G....
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01257
He has been a good provider for his family and is involved in his community. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends the applicants service characterization be corrected to reflect honorable, the narrative reason for separation be changed to Secretarial Authority and SPD code to JFF. Although the applicant provides another reason for his discharge, his master personnel records show he was separated under the provisions...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00588
The Board found that the applicant did commit an act of sodomy and recommended he be discharged from the Air Force with an undesirable discharge. On 28 Sep 61, the applicant applied to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. Applicant's Master Personnel Records Exhibit C. AFDRB Hearing Record, dated 8 Nov 61, w/atchs Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 12 Mar 04 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Mar 04 GREGORY H....
'and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Review of medical records does not disclose any evidence to support correction of records from length of service retirement to disability retirement or to link his demotion to a nonexistent (at the time) medical condition. RECOMMENDATION: The Medical Consultant is of the opinion that no change in the records is warranted and the application should be denied.
On 21 Feb 57, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force in the grade of airman basic under the provisions of AFR 39-17 (Unfitness) with an undesirable discharge. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Military Personnel Management Specialist, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed this application and indicated that the applicant did not identify any specific errors in the discharge proceedings nor provide facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge he received. Exhibit B.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02117
Based on the Board's decision, there were three possible results: they would be retained in the service, discharged with an honorable or general characterization, or discharged with an undesirable characterization. The complete JA evaluation is at Exhibit B. AFPC/DPSOA states although not requested, their office addresses Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) codes in cases involving separation under Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) or similar policy. If it is determined a RE code should have been...