AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NO: 98-00816 NOV 1 3 1998
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
Applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to
honorable. Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A.
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 the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D).
A s of this date, no response has been received by this office.
After careful consideration of applicant's request and the
limited 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
applicant.
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. Rita S. Looney, Mr. Steven A. Shaw, and
Mr. Patrick R. Wheeler considered this application on 3 November
1998 in accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction
3 6 - 2 6 0 3 , and the governing statute,
*
/ u*+i._1552
A
Panel Chair
v
Exhibits:
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinion
D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
DEPARTMENT OF THE A I R FORCE
HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE PERSONNEL CENTER
RANDOLPH AIR FORCE BASE TEXAS
MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR
FROM: HQ AFPC/DPPRS
550 C Street West Ste 11
Randolph AFB TX 78 150-47 13
The applicant, while serving in the grade of private was discharged from the Air Force 23 Jun
50 under the provisions of AFR 39-14 (Convenience of the Government) and received an under
honorable conditions (general) discharge.
Requested Action. The applicant is requesting his discharge be upgraded to honorable.
Discussion. Applicant's master personnel record contains only 1'
note however, applicant was released from confinement status at t
guardhouse to duty status on 16 Jun 60 per a morning report entry for that date. No other
information is available to evaluate the reason applicant received an under honorable conditions
(general) discharge.
'
Recommendation. Applicant has not provided evidence to support a change in the character of
discharge he received over 47 years ago. Recommend denial. He has not submitted a timely
request.
JOHN C. WOOTEN, GS-9
Military Personnel Mgmt Spec
Separations Branch
Dir of Personnel Program Management
980081 6
-. . . .. . . . . . .
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The commander advised applicant that if his recommendation is approved, that his discharge would be described as entry level separation and that he would be ineligible for reenlistment in the Air Force. The records indicate member’s military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken.
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The commander advised applicant that if his recommendation is approved, that his discharge would be described as entry level separation and that he would be ineligible for reenlistment in the Air Force. The records indicate member’s military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken.
f. Applicant is not eligible for the Air Force Good Conduct Medal because there is a letter of denial in his records, a letter denying him reenlistment because of his conduct, and he had an Un- favorable Information File (UIF). DEPARTMENT OF THE A I R FORCE HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE PERSONNEL CENTER RANDOLPH AIR PORCE BASE TEXAS HQ AFPCDPPPRA 550 C Street West Ste 12 Randolph AFB TX 78150-4714 3 March 1998 This is in partial response to your 13 Feb 98 Application for Correction of Military...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). - 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. Applicant did not identi@ any specific errors in the discharg&progessing nor provide facts which warrant a change in the discharge he received.
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 the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). The records indicate member’s military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C) . 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. Available Master Personnel Records C. Advisory Opinion D. SAF/MIBR L t r Forwarding Advisory Opinion D E P A R T M E N T O F T H E A I R F O R C E HEADQUARTERS...
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 the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). disapproval of the applicant's request for award of Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon.
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 98-01852 COUNSEL : HEARING DESIRED: NO FFB ' 9 l99F I Applicant requests that his DD Form 214 be amended to reflect the country at the end of each overseas tour ribbon. The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the The advisory opinion was application be denied (Exhibit C ) . Applicant requests his DD Form 2 14...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). While on a tour, he stopped the bus for the members to see a herd of camels. This office is responsible for determining Air Force members’ eligibility and entitlement to awards and decorations, and your case was sent to us for review.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Applicant’s master personnel record does not contain the discharge case file however, his DD Form 2 14 indicates his discharge was for misconduct- sexual deviation. Applicant did not identi@ any specific errors in the discharge processing nor provide facts which warrant an upgrade of the discharge he received over 15 years ago and...