Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9901344
Original file (9901344.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  99-01344
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED:  No

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was informed in 1953 that if he accepted an undesirable discharge
that it would automatically be reinstated to an honorable  discharge
in a two-year period.  He was further advised that he would  not  be
able to keep  his  $10,000  insurance  policy  upon  his  return  to
civilian status.  After all these years and his advanced years  (age
65), it is a matter of personal pride for him and his  grandchildren
to have this discharge upgraded to honorable.

Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts pertaining to this  application,  extracted  from
the applicant’s  military  records,  are  contained  in  the  letter
prepared by the appropriate office of the Air  Force.   Accordingly,
there  is  no  need  to  recite  these  facts  in  this  Record   of
Proceedings.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI), Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an  investigative  report
which is attached at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Military Personnel Management Specialist,  AFPC/DPPRS,  reviewed
this  application  and  indicated  that,  while  applicant  did  not
identify  any  specific  errors   in   the   discharge   processing,
considering the discharge occurred over 45 years ago, they recommend
clemency.  If a  check  of  the  FBI  files  proves  negative,  they
recommend the discharge be upgraded to  under  honorable  conditions
(general).

A  complete  copy  of  the  Air  Force  evaluation  is  attached  at
Exhibit D.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was  forwarded  to  applicant  on
3 Sep 99 for review and response.  As of this date, no response  has
been received by this office.

A copy of the FBI report was forwarded to applicant on 1 Jun 00  for
review and response.  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.     Insufficient  relevant  evidence  has   been   presented   to
demonstrate the existence of probable  error  or  injustice.   After
careful  consideration  of  the  available  evidence,  we  found  no
evidence that the applicant’s discharge were improper or contrary to
the provisions of the governing regulations in effect at  the  time,
or that the actions  taken  against  the  applicant  were  based  on
factors other than his own misconduct.  In addition, in view of  the
contents of the FBI Identification Record, we are not persuaded that
the applicant’s discharge warrants an upgrade to  honorable  on  the
basis of clemency.  Having found no error or injustice  with  regard
to the actions that occurred while  the  applicant  was  a  military
member, we conclude that no basis exists to grant  favorable  action
on his request.

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 April  2000  and  12 July  2000,  under  the
provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-2603:

                  Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Panel Chair
                  Mr. Patrick R. Wheeler, Member
                  Mr. Jackson A. Hauslein, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 May 99, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  FBI Report.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 12 Aug 99.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 3 Sep 99.
     Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 2 Jun 00.



                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02357

    Original file (BC-2004-02357.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02357 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded. He received 14 days’ restriction. After careful consideration of the applicant’s request and the available evidence of record, we see no evidence that would warrant...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9903263

    Original file (9903263.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 99-03263 INDEX NUMBER: A39; 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The report was forwarded to the applicant for review and response, within 30 days (Exhibit F). ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0101873

    Original file (0101873.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-01873 INDEX CODE: 110.00 (DECEASED) COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO __________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her late husband’s undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. Nevertheless, noting that the former servicemember suffered the adverse effects of his undesirable discharge for almost 37 years before his death in 1984 and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9901778

    Original file (9901778.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 16 Dec 66, he was discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). Exhibit C. FBI Report, dated 16 Dec 99. THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ Panel Chair AFBCMR 99-01778 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00723

    Original file (BC-2005-00723.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00723 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 3 SEP 2006 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. They found the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. Exhibit B.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 0001883

    Original file (0001883.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A copy of the AFDRB Hearing Record is appended at Exhibit C. Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, WV, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Separations Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, stated that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation at the time of his discharge from...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01915

    Original file (BC-2006-01915.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002298

    Original file (0002298.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 Separations Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed the application and states the applicant was court-martialed because he pled guilty in a civil court and was sentenced to one-year civil confinement for assault with intent to rob. They further...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0101053

    Original file (0101053.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    At that time, the applicant was also invited to provide additional evidence pertaining to his activities since leaving the service (Exhibit G). After careful consideration of the available facts contained in the Air Force Discharge Review Board brief surrounding the applicant’s discharge, we find no impropriety in the characterization of the applicant’s discharge. Exhibit B.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03691

    Original file (BC-2003-03691.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s grade at time of discharge was airman basic (AB/E-1). Based on available documentation in the file, they found the discharge consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge directives in effect at the time of discharge. Having found insufficient evidence of an error or injustice with regard to the actions that occurred while the applicant was a military member, we conclude that no basis exists to grant favorable action on his request.