RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-00805
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
___________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to
honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Being young at the time, he was given bad advice and truly regrets it to
this day.
Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 24 November 1959 in the
grade of airman basic for a period of four years.
On 29 March 1965, applicant was notified of his commander's intent to
initiate discharge action against him because he demonstrated
characteristics of unsuitability and could not develop skills in absorbing
military training to become a satisfactory airman. He had been removed
from 5-level on-the-job training (OJT) due to his inability to concentrate
on any one job and constantly failing to accomplish his assigned tasks. An
evaluation officer (EO) advised that the applicant did not desire to submit
a rebuttal or to make any statements. The EO recommended that the
applicant be discharge for unsuitability and given a general discharge. On
5 April 1961, the discharge authority approved the recommendation for
discharge.
Applicant was discharged on 18 April 1961, in the grade of A/3C with a
general (under honorable conditions) discharge, under the provisions of AFR
39-16 (Unsuitability). He had completed 1 year, 4 months and 25 days of
total active military service.
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of investigation,
Washington, D.C., indicated that on the basis of the data furnished, they
were unable to locate an arrest record (Exhibit E).
___________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Separations Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, states that there are no errors or
irregularities causing an injustice to the applicant; and that the
discharge complies with directives in effect at the time of his discharge.
Applicant did not identify any specific errors in the discharge processing
nor provide facts that warrant an upgrade of the discharge he received.
Therefore, they recommend denial of his request.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
___________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
In response to the Board’s request for post-service documentation, the
applicant submitted additional documentation which is attached at 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. 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.
Considered alone, we conclude the discharge proceedings were proper and
characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing
circumstances.
4. Consideration of this Board, however, is not limited to the events
which precipitated the discharge. We have a Congressional mandate which
permits consideration of other factors; e.g., applicant's background, the
overall quality of service, and post-service activities and
accomplishments. Further, we may base our decision on matters of equity
and clemency rather than simply on whether rules and regulations which
existed at the time were followed. This is a much broader consideration
than officials involved in the discharge were permitted, and our decision
in no way discredits the validity of theirs.
5. Under our broader mandate and after careful consideration of all the
facts and circumstances of applicant's case, we are persuaded that
applicant has been a productive member of society. We recognize the
adverse impact of the discharge applicant received; and, while it may have
been appropriate at the time, we believe it would be an injustice for
applicant to continue to suffer its effects. Accordingly, we find that
corrective action is appropriate as a matter of equity and on the basis of
clemency.
___________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating
to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 18 April 1961, he was honorably
discharged and furnished an Honorable Discharge certificate.
The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive
Session on 9 December 1999, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Vaughn E. Schlunz, Panel Chair
Dr. Gerald B. Kauvar, Member
Mr. Gregory H. Petkoff, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The following
documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 April 1999, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 25 June 1999.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 2 August 1999.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atchs.
Exhibit F. FBI Report.
VAUGHN E. SCHLUNZ
Panel Chair
AFBCMR 99-00805
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 records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to xxxxxxxx, be corrected to show that on 18 April 1961, he was
honorably discharged and furnished an Honorable Discharge certificate.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
The records indicate the member’s military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel states that it would appear that the petitioner would be discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10, paragraph 5-26, 3b,c, unsatisfactory performance, or failure to maintain dress or personal hygiene. Exhibit B.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-01077 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. Under our broader mandate and after careful consideration of all the facts and circumstances of the member’s case, we are persuaded that applicant has been a productive member of...
He has two honorable discharges and one general discharge. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and indicated that he has tried many times over the years to get his discharge upgraded. BARBARA A. WESTGATE Panel Chair AFBCMR 99-00818 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01351
He received a letter of counseling (LOC) on 17 October 2001 for being late for duty. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we are not persuaded that his contention of no longer being affected by “previous flaws”, in and by themselves, are sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 8 May 03.
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1995-01952A
We find no impropriety in the characterization of decedent’s discharge. Under our broader mandate and after careful consideration of all the facts and circumstances of the applicant's case, we are persuaded that her late husband became a productive member of society. CHARLES E. BENNETT Panel Chair AFBCMR 95-01952 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...
We find no impropriety in the characterization of decedent’s discharge. Under our broader mandate and after careful consideration of all the facts and circumstances of the applicant's case, we are persuaded that her late husband became a productive member of society. CHARLES E. BENNETT Panel Chair AFBCMR 95-01952 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...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-00938 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. The Board recommended an undesirable discharge. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the...
Under our broader mandate and after careful consideration of all the facts and circumstances of applicant's case, the Board is persuaded that applicant has been a productive member of society since leaving the service. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 21 Jan 60, he was discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). JOSEPH G. DIAMOND Panel...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Mil Personnel Mgt Specialist, Separations Branch, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed the application and states that based on the information submitted in the case and considering the offenses that caused the applicant to be given a UOTHC discharge, they would have no objection to an upgrade of his discharge to an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. Considered alone, we conclude the discharge...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01239
He received one Airman Performance Report (APR) closing 5 March 1957, in which the overall evaluation was “Very Good.” On 3 September 1957, applicant was separated from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-14, Convenience of the Government, with an honorable 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 24...