AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NO: 9 8 - 0 1 8 4 5
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
.FEB 1 9 1999
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).
Applicant's response to the advisory opinion is at Exhibit E.
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 adequately 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 Mr. Michael P. Higgins, Mr. William E.
Edwards, and Mr. Patrick R. Wheeler considered this application
on 1 December 1 9 9 8 in accordance with the provisions of Air Force
Instruction 3 6 - 2 6 0 3 , and the governing statute, 10, U.S.C. 1552-.
Panel Chair
Exhibits:
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinion
D.
E. Applicant's Response
SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
D E P A R T M E N T O F T H E A I R FORCE
H E A D Q U A R T E R S AIR FORCE P E R S O N N E L C E N T E R
R A N D O L P H AIR FORCE BASE TEXAS
MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR
FROM: HQ AFPCDPPRS
550 C Street West Ste 11
Randolph AFB TX 78 150-471 3
The applicant, while serving in the grade of airman basic, was discharged from the Air Force 11
Jun 65 under the provisions of AFM 39-17 Qvhsconduct-Frequent Involvement of a Discreditable
Nature) with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. He served 02 years 01 month
and 26 days total active service.
Requested Action. Applicant is requesting an upgrade of his discharge to honorable.
Basis for Request. Applicant claims he was not given legal representation nor given a chance
to defend himself
Facts. On 14 May 65, applicant was notified by his commander that involuntary discharge
action had been initiated against him for his frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with
military and civil authorities. The commander indicated applicant had been given Art 15 action
because he consumed alcohol in the barracks, given a second Art 15 for leaving his appointed
place of duty, was convicted in civil court for petty larceny. Military counsel was appointed to
assist the applicant. After consulting an appointed military legal counsel, applicant signed a
waiver of his right to a hearing before a board of officers. The case was reviewed by the base
legal office and was found to be legally sufficient to support discharge. The discharge authority
approved the recommendation for discharge on 17 Jun 65 and directed that the applicant be
fbrnished a general discharge certificate without probation and rehabilitation.
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 records indicate member’s military service was reviewed and
appropriate action was taken.
Recommendation. Applicant did not identifl any specific errors in the discharge processing nor
provide facts which warrant an upgrade of the discharge he received over 33 years ago. He was
provided legal representation and he voluntarily waive his right to a board hearing. Accordingly,
we recommend applicant’s request be denied. He has not filed a timely request.
JOHN C. WOOTEN, DAF
Military Personnel Mgmt Spec
Separations Branch
Dir of Personnel Program Management
I
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). On 11 Feb 70, the discharge authority approved the recommendation for discharge for unfitness and directed the applicant be issued an under honorable conditions (general) discharge certificate. 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 ) . The discharge authority approved the recommendation for discharge on 27 Oct 72 and directed that the applicant be fbrnished an undesirable discharge certificate without probation and rehabilitation. 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). Applicant did not identif) any specific errors in the discharge processing nor provide facts which warrant an upgrade of the discharge he received. Accordingly, we recommend applicant's request be denied.
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion 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. Applicant did not identifjl any specific errors in the discharge processing nor provide facts which warrant a change in the...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant’s request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Available Master Personnel Records C. Advisory Opinions D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinions E. Applicant’s Response D E P A R T M E N T OF T H E A I R F O R C E H E A D Q U A R T E R S AIR FORCE P E R S O N N E L C E N T E R R A N D O L P H AIR FORCE B A S E TEXAS AUG 3 11998 MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR FROM: HQ AFPCDPPRS 550 C...
Advise applicant of the decision of the Board,the right to a personal appearance with counsel and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR. ORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. The Board concluded the misconduct described in the applicant’s record warranted the General characterization.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Consistent with his findings, the evaluation officer recommended discharge with a general discharge certificate. The records indicate member's military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken.
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 97-01826 (Case 2) COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO I Applicant requests that the narrative reason for separation be changed from marginal performer to convenience of the government; that his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2P be change to a 1; and that his separation code of JEM be changed. The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions...
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 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.
On 28 Oct 92, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant I s request for upgrade of his UOTHC discharge to honorable (Exhibit B). The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Records indicate member’s military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken.