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.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Based on his past records and an honorable discharge 16 March 1951, he
admits he made a few mistakes but that should not render retention in
the service in the form of an undesirable discharge.
Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 17 March 1951, for a
period of six years.
The applicant appeared before an administrative discharge board of
officers for the purpose of determining his fitness for retention in
the military. The reason for the board was that the applicant had
repeatedly committed offenses punishable by summary court-martial as
well as petty offenses. He was afforded counsel and was present
during the board proceedings. Evidence introduced indicated applicant
had been court-martialed for being absent from his place of duty less
than 24 hours. He was court-martialed for driving a vehicle without
an operator permit and again court-martialed for breaking restriction.
He had a total of 60 days lost time due to military confinement for
these convictions. The Board’s findings were that the applicant had
given evidence of habits that rendered his retention in the military
as undesirable. The Board recommended an undesirable discharge.
The applicant, while serving in the grade of airman basic, was
discharged from the Air Force on 2 June 1953, under the provisions of
AFR 39-17 (Unfitness) and received an undesirable discharge. He
served 5 years 2 months and 24 days total active service.
Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Washington, D.C., indicated on the basis of the data furnished they
were unable to locate an arrest record (Exhibit C).
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Military Personnel Management Specialist, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed the
application and states that the applicant did not identify any
specific errors in the discharge processing. However, considering
applicant’s age at the time of the incidents, his otherwise honorable
service record and the severity of the crime, they recommend clemency.
If a check of the Federal Bureau of Investigation files proves
negative, they recommend the discharge be upgraded to under honorable
condition (general) discharge.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 9 August 1999, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to
the applicant for review and response within 30 days. As of this
date, no response has been received by this office.
_________________________________________________________________
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. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of probable error or injustice warranting an upgrade of
applicant’s discharge one under honorable conditions (general). As
stated in the Air Force evaluation, they recommend clemency
considering applicant’s age at the time of the incidents, his
otherwise honorable service record and the severity of the crime.
They also recommend the discharge be upgraded to under honorable
condition (general) if a check of the Federal Bureau of Investigation
files proves negative. Since it appears that the applicant has been
clear of any criminal involvement since his discharge, we recommend
his discharge up upgraded to an under honorable conditions (general).
His request for an honorable discharge was considered; however, based
on his overall record, we do not believe that a fully honorable
discharge is warranted.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 2 June 1953, he
was discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable
conditions).
_________________________________________________________________
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
Mr. Gregory H. Petkoff, Member
Dr. Gerald B. Kauvar, Member
Ms. Phyllis L. Spence, Examiner (without vote)
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 24 Apr 99.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. FBI Report
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 15 Jul 99.
VAUGHN E. SCHLUNZ
Panel Chair
AFBCMR 99-00938
INDEX CODE: 110.00
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 2 June 1953,
he was discharged with service characterized as general (under
honorable conditions).
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
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...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-03544 INDEX CODE: 110.00 APPLICANT COUNSEL: None SSN HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to an under honorable (general) conditions discharge. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, the Board majority is not persuaded to recommend upgrading the discharge. In...
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.
A complete copy of the Air Staff evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states the incident on the FBI report is correct, but he has since that time earned his Master's and Journeyman's license in plumbing. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-01014 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: MICHAEL J. CLOONAN HEARING DESIRED: NO Applicant requests that his discharge be upgraded to honorable. The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant...
Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Directorate of Personnel Program Management, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed this application and states that on 10 February 1956, applicant’s commander requested that he be involuntarily discharge for civil conviction. The Air Force in their advisory of 30...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-00698 INDEX CODE: 110.00 APPLICANT (Deceased) COUNSEL: None SSN HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His late father’s under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, D.C., provided an investigative...
In view of the findings, the board recommended that the applicant be discharged and furnished an undesirable discharge. The records indicate the applicant’s military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken. Accordingly, DPPRS recommended the applicant’s request be denied (Exhibit C).
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. The EO recommended that the applicant be discharge for unsuitability and given a general discharge. Exhibit B.
On 19 June 1953, he was discharged from the Air Force with a bad conduct discharge. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Military Personnel Management Specialist, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed the application and states the applicant had two previous summary courts- martial for being...