RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02267
INDEX NUMBER: A50.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The reasons the applicant believes the records to be in error or
unjust and the evidence submitted in support of the appeal are at
Exhibit A.
___________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Based on the DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report
of Transfer or Discharge, the applicant is a former member who was
discharged with an undesirable discharge on 27 September 1957,
under the provisions of AFR 39-17 (Unfitness). He served 2 years,
3 months and 22 days on active duty, with 156 days of lost time.
The applicant's military personnel records were apparently
destroyed by fire in 1973. Therefore, the facts surrounding his
separation from the Air Force cannot be verified.
___________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Based on the AFBCMR memorandum, dated 17 November 1992, the case
was forwarded for the Board’s consideration without an advisory
opinion, because discharge information is not available.
Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI), Clarksburg, WV, provided a report of the
applicant’s arrest record (Exhibit C).
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF FBI REPORT:
A copy of the FBI report was forwarded to the applicant on
14 December 2000, for review and response within 30 days
(Exhibit D). 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. Based
upon the presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental
affairs and without evidence to the contrary, we must assume that
the applicant's discharge was proper and in compliance with
appropriate directives. Therefore, based on the available evidence
of record, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider this
application.
4. Although the applicant did not specifically request
consideration based on clemency, we also find insufficient evidence
to warrant a recommendation that the discharge be upgraded on that
basis. We weighed the limited support submitted with the
application and the available evidence related to his post-service
conduct. 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 30 January 2001, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Vice Chair
Ms. Peggy E. Gordon, Member
Mr. Frederick R. Beaman, III, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Aug 2000, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's DD Form 214.
Exhibit C. FBI Report.
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Vice Chair
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. 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,...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01967
Other than the applicant’s attached brief and a copy of his Certificate of Military Service obtained from NPRC, the facts leading to the discharge are not available in his records. On 7 December 1979 the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his undesirable discharge to an honorable discharge. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the...
In support of his application, the applicant provided copies of an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board and his separation documents (Exhibit A). Based on the limited evidence available for the Board’s review, we are not persuaded that further relief in the form of an upgrade of his discharge to honorable is warranted. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 13 April 2001.
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.
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...
Other facts surrounding his discharge from the Air Force are unknown inasmuch as the complete discharge correspondence is not available. They also stated that the applicant did not provide evidence of error in his discharge case and that since the discharge occurred over 20 years ago, and considering the misconduct that led to his UOTHC discharge, they recommend clemency. Although the applicant did not specifically request consideration based on clemency, we also find insufficient evidence...
The commander told him he could, but that he would have to receive and undesirable discharge; however, after his discharge he could request the Veterans Administration (VA) upgrade his discharge to general. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicant’s complete submission, we find no evidence of error or injustice. Exhibit B.
Applicant’s DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, reflects that he was discharged on 4 June 1980, under the provisions of AFM 39-12, by reason of Request for Discharge for the Good of the Service, with a UOTHC discharge. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, WV, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03045
In his application dated 12 January 2008, applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On 24 July 2008, the Board staff requested the applicant provide documentation pertaining to his post-service activities, within 30 days (Exhibit B). Regarding his request for a medical discharge; other than his own assertions, insufficient evidence has been provided which would lead us to believe that at the time of his separation, a physical condition existed...
After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicant’s complete submission, we find no evidence of error or injustice. In this respect, we note that the applicant’s discharge appears to be in compliance with the governing Air Force Regulation in effect at the time of his separation and he was afforded all the rights to which entitled. Exhibit B.