RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-03035
INDEX NUMBER: A67; A48
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 are stated on the application at Exhibit A. No evidence was
submitted in support of the appeal.
___________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is a former member who was discharged from the Air
Force on 19 November 1954, under the provisions of AFR 39-17
(Unfitness), with an undesirable discharge. He served 2 years,
1 month and 2 days on active duty, with 29 days of lost time.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application,
extracted from the applicant’s records, are contained in the letter
prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C.
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, WV, provided a report of the
applicant’s arrest record.
___________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Separations Branch, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed the application and
recommended upgrading the discharge to general (under honorable
conditions) on the basis of clemency, provided a check of FBI files
proves negative. They considered the length of time since
discharge, the reason for the discharge, and the applicant’s
otherwise honorable service. A complete copy of the evaluation is
at Exhibit C.
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant
on 12 January 2001, for review and response, within 30 days
(Exhibit D).
Additionally, on 5 February 2001, the AFBCMR staff provided the
applicant copies of the FBI report and the Information Bulletin,
for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit E). The
applicant’s response, with attachments, is at Exhibit F.
___________________________________________________________________
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 the applicant was not afforded all of the rights to which
he is entitled at the time of discharge. We conclude, therefore,
that the discharge proceedings were proper and the 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
weighed the applicant's overall quality of service, the events
which precipitated the discharge, and the available evidence
related to his conduct since leaving the service against the
limited support submitted in response to the AFBCMR’s request for
information concerning his 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 14 March 2001, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Terry A. Yonkers, Panel Chair
Ms. Carolyn J. Watkins, Member
Mr. John E. Pettit, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Oct 2000.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 5 Dec 2000.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 12 Jan 2001.
Exhibit E. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 5 Feb 2001, w/atchs.
Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 17 Feb 2001, w/atchs.
TERRY A. YONKERS
Panel Chair
Therefore, while the applicant’s daughter has recanted her story, we find no such documentation from this other victim. Further, we also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency. Exhibit H. Counsel's response, dated 27 Oct 99, w/atchs.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-03236 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge and his 25 days of lost time be removed from his records. We therefore agree with the recommendation of the Air Force that the applicant’s discharge should be upgraded to general (under...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-02972 INDEX CODE: 110 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 5 May 82, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFM 39-12 (Request For Discharge for the Good of the Service) with service characterized as under other than honorable...
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member who was discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge on 7 October 1958, under the provisions of AFR 39-16 (Discharge for inaptitude or unsuitability - other reasons) and Letter, Department of the Air Force, dated 1 December 1955, “Discharge of Airmen During Their First Enlistment.” He had served 2 years and 5 months on active duty. It appears that...
f. Vacation of nonjudicial punishment, dated 9 Jul 81, for failure to go to guardmount at the time prescribed. The complete report is at Exhibit F. _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT”S RESPONSE TO FBI REPORT: A copy of the FBI report was forwarded to the applicant on 23 Oct 01 for review and comment within 30 days. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 14 Sep 01.
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied applicant’s request for an upgrade in her discharge on 1 February 1995. The records indicate the member’s military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 23 August 1989, she was honorably discharged and furnished an Honorable Discharge Certificate.
On 16 October 1957, applicant was discharged in the grade of airman basic, under the provisions of AFR 39-18 (Court Conviction), and received a bad conduct discharge. We conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances. We also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency.
On 16 October 1957, applicant was discharged in the grade of airman basic, under the provisions of AFR 39-18 (Court Conviction), and received a bad conduct discharge. We conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances. We also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency.
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 Separations Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, stated that the applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. Since his discharge occurred over 48 years ago and considering he was only 19...
The Board recommended discharge from the service because of unfitness, with an undesirable 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: On 15 Feb 01, the Separations Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed the application and states that the applicant did not provide evidence of errors...