RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-02273
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to
an honorable discharge.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His childhood was difficult and the military was a way to better himself.
While in the military, he met and married his wife. With the war over,
life was good until problems at home required him to decide between his
family and his military career. He sought advice from his chaplain who
helped his commanding officer decide to have him separate from the military
with an other than honorable condition discharge. He states the reason for
his request to upgrade his discharge is so that his family can bury him in
a Maryland military cemetery.
In support of his request, he submits a personal statement.
Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant's military personnel records were destroyed by fire in 1973.
Therefore, neither his service in the Air Force nor the facts surrounding
his separation can be verified.
Based on available records, applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on
14 January 1954 for a period of four (4) years.
On 26 October 1956, applicant was discharged in the grade of airman basic,
under the provisions of AFR 39-17 (Unfitness), and received an under other
than honorable conditions discharge. He served 2 years, 9 months and 13
days total active duty.
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Washington, D.C., was unable to identify with arrest record on basis of
information furnished Exhibit F.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Director of Personnel Program Management, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed the
application and states that applicant’s master personnel records were
destroyed in the St. Louis fire and they are unable to make a
recommendation. He has not filed a timely request.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 21
December 1998 for review and response within 30 days. As of this date, no
response has been received by this office.
Applicant has provided, through his Senator’s office, documentation
regarding his post service activities. Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________
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. We find no impropriety in the characterization of applicant's
discharge. It appears that responsible officials applied appropriate
standards in effecting the separation, and we do not find persuasive
evidence that pertinent regulations were violated or that applicant was not
afforded all the rights to which entitled at the time of discharge. We
conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and
characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing
circumstances.
4. We also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that
the discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency. We have considered
applicant's overall quality of service, the events which precipitated the
discharge, and
available evidence related to post-service activities and accomplishments.
On balance, we do not believe that clemency is warranted.
_________________________________________________________________
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 27 May 1999, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Douglas J. Heady, Panel Chair
Dr. Gerald B. Kauvar, Member
Ms. Peggy E. Gordon, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, undated, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 3 December 1998.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 21 December 1998.
Exhibit E. FBI Report.
DOUGLAS J. HEADY
Panel Chair
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided a copy of an investigation report, which is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Separations Branch, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed this application and indicated that because the applicant’s master personnel records were destroyed in a fire, they are unable to make a recommendation. The evidence of record reflects that the...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-03512 INDEX CODE: A61.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. In support of his appeal, the applicant provided several post-service letters. Exhibit B.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-00349 INDEX CODE: 110.00 APPLICANT COUNSEL: None SSN HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Separations Branch, Directorate of Personnel Program Mgmt, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed the...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-00424 INDEX CODE: 121.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ____________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Six days of lost leave be restored. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Field Activities Division, HQ AFPC/DPSF, reviewed this application and states that applicant had 50 days...
The commander advised applicant that if his recommendation was approved, that his discharge would be described as entry level separation and that he would be ineligible for reenlistment in the Air Force. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the evaluation and states that it was explained to him by Air Force personnel that if...
On 7 September 1983, applicant received an Article 15 for wrongfully having in his possession, and using, some quantity of marijuana on or about 4 August 1983, with imposed punishment as reduction in grade to airman, with a new date of rank 7 September 1983, and ordered to forfeit $100.00. Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02234
In support of the application, the applicant submits a statement from the former member’s daughter, an Air Force Discharge Review Board application, a Certification of Military Service, an Honorable Discharge Certificate (AF Reserves), a medical prognosis, letter from National Personnel Records Center, and a general power of attorney. Applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors in the discharge processing, nor provide facts that support upgrading the discharge to honorable....
A complete copy of the Report of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit E. In a letter dated 22 August 1998, applicant stated the following: “On my DD214 it states the reason for my discharge was due to a Court Martial. 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 and adopt their rationale as the basis for the conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-02351 INDEX CODE 106.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 1944 dishonorable discharge be upgraded to honorable. The applicant has provided no copies of his records. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A complete copy...
While separating from the Air Force, he was told that he would only be given a paid move to his HOR and anything else was up to him. DPPRS indicated that the applicant elected to separate at Air Force Base as indicated in his application to separate under the Palace Chase program. In view of the above, we recommend that the applicant’s records be corrected as indicated below, which will provide the applicant with the proper relief.