RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-01471
COUNSEL: THE AMERICAN LEGION
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His undesirable discharge should be upgraded to at least a general
(under honorable conditions) discharge.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He has always assisted Veterans and now that his health is getting
worse, he needs help from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA).
In support of his request, the applicant submits a personal statement
and character reference letters (Exhibit A).
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant's military personnel records reflect that he enlisted in the
Regular Air Force on 19 March 1948 for a period of three years.
On 23 December 1949, the applicant appeared in civil court and was
convicted upon his plea of guilty to robbery and sentenced to one to
three years in civil confinement. On 14 February 1950, applicant’s
commander recommended that he be discharged from the Air Force under
AFR 39-22 because he had been convicted by civil authorities. The
discharge authority approved the applicant’s discharge on 17 February
1950 and directed that he be issued an undesirable discharge.
The applicant received an undesirable discharge on 28 February 1950
under the provisions of AFR 39-22 (Civil Court Conviction). He had
completed 1 year, 7 months and 7 days of active duty and was serving
in the grade of private at the time of discharge. He had a total of
123 days of lost time.
Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Clarksburg, WV, indicated on 28 September 1998, that, on the basis of
data furnished, they are unable to locate an arrest record.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Separations Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, stated that the case has been
reviewed and the discharge was consistent with the procedural and
substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, it was within
the discretion of the discharge authority, and the applicant was
provided full administrative due process. Although the applicant
stated he had nothing to do with the robbery, that he had only given a
ride to the two men who committed the robbery, DPPRS noted that he did
plea guilty to the crime and was found guilty in court. The applicant
did not submit evidence or identify any errors in the discharge
processing nor provide facts which warrant an upgrade of the discharge
he received over 48 years ago. Accordingly, DPPRS recommended
applicant’s request be denied. A complete copy of this evaluation is
appended at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant and
counsel on 6 July 1998 for review and response. As of this date, no
response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).
_________________________________________________________________
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 probable error or injustice. No evidence has been
presented to indicate that the applicant’s service characterization,
which had its basis in his civilian conviction, was improper or
contrary to the governing regulation under which it was effected.
Although the applicant provided documentation regarding his post-
service activities, we find this information to be of limited scope
and, in our view, it does not meet the criteria for a finding based on
clemency. Should the applicant provide additional documentation
pertaining to his post-service activities, the Board may be willing to
reconsider his request for clemency at a later time. In view of the
foregoing, we conclude that no basis exists to recommend favorable
action on the applicant’s request that his undesirable discharge be
upgraded to general.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been
shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will
materially add to our understanding of the issue(s) involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of probable 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 this application in
Executive Session on 5 January 1999, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Benedict A. Kausal IV, Panel Chair
Mr. Patrick R. Wheeler, Member
Mrs. Margaret A. Zook, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 2 Apr 98, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 19 Jun 98.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 6 Jul 98.
BENEDICT A. KAUSAL IV
Panel Chair
The applicant did not submit evidence or identify any errors in the discharge processing nor provide facts which warrant an upgrade of the discharge he received over 48 years ago. Should the applicant provide additional documentation pertaining to his post-service activities, the Board may be willing to reconsider his request for clemency at a later time. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence...
Upon his discharge in 1969, his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) indicated that, in addition to the then current four years “net service this period” he was given creditable service “other service” of 1 year, 2 months, and 3 days. He has lived his adult life with the thought that his undesirable time was deemed creditable as a result of his original appeal to the AFDRB and serving honorably the additional 4 years. Insufficient relevant...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-01004
Upon his discharge in 1969, his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) indicated that, in addition to the then current four years “net service this period” he was given creditable service “other service” of 1 year, 2 months, and 3 days. He has lived his adult life with the thought that his undesirable time was deemed creditable as a result of his original appeal to the AFDRB and serving honorably the additional 4 years. Insufficient relevant...
He then received a third court-martial conviction for failure to go. The records indicate member’s military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and states that after receiving what he was told to be a general discharge, because of financial and family problems, he went to flight school.
On 19 February 1954, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-17 (Unfitness), with an undesirable discharge. We note that the applicant provided some character references pertaining to his post-service activities; however, the Board does not believe this evidence is sufficient to warrant clemency. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 5 December 2001, under...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02644 INDEX CODE: 110.00, 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of “2C” be changed to “3A” to allow eligibility to enlist in the Air Force Reserves. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Separations...
On 10 Aug 53, he was reduced to the grade of Airman 3rd Class under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ, for failure to report at appointed time to his place of duty and making a false statement. On 25 Oct 54, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (DRB) examined and reviewed the applicant’s request for discharge upgrade and concluded that the evidence submitted was insufficient to warrant a change in the type or nature of his discharge, and accordingly denied his request (see Exhibit C). ...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-00936 INDEX NUMBER:106.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. Other facts surrounding his discharge from the Air Force are unknown inasmuch as the complete discharge correspondence is not available. Applicant submitted a brief summary of his...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). Available Master Personnel Records C. Advisory Opinion D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE PERSONNEL CENTER RANDOLPH AIR FORCE BASE TEXAS MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR FROM: HQ AFPC/DPPRS 550 C Street West Ste I1 Randolph AFB TX 78 150-471 3 SUBJECT: Application for Correction of...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01435
_________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 17 November 1950, he was honorably discharged and furnished an Honorable Discharge Certificate. Exhibit B. THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ Chair AFBCMR BC-2006-01435 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of...