Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0101632
Original file (0101632.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NO.: 01-01632
                                   INDEX CODE:  110.00


    .                        COUNSEL:  NONE

                             HEARING DESIRED:  NO


The applicant requests his under other than honorable  conditions  (general)
discharge be upgraded  to  honorable.   The  applicant's  submission  is  at
Exhibit A.

On 13 July 2001, the applicant was advised that his  application  was  being
administratively closed  due  to  unsuccessful  attempts  in  obtaining  his
military records and  his  inability  to  furnish  documents  verifying  his
military service.  On 14 September 2001, the applicant submitted a  copy  of
his discharge order and his case has been reopened.

The applicant’s separation orders indicate  that  he  was  discharged  under
honorable conditions in the grade of airman basic on 20 November 1958  under
the provisions  of  AFR  39-16  by  reason  of  “Discharge  of  Unproductive
Airman.”  No further  information  concerning  the  applicant’s  service  is
available.

After  careful  consideration  of  applicant's  request  and  the  available
evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or  injustice  to
warrant corrective action.  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.


Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.

The  Board  staff  is  directed  to  inform  applicant  of  this   decision.
Applicant should also be informed that this decision is final and will  only
be reconsidered upon the presentation of new  relevant  evidence  which  was
not available at the time the application was filed.

Members of the Board Mr. John L. Robuck,  Ms.  Marcia  J.  Bachman  and  Mr.
Clarence D. Long, III., considered this application on 3  October  2001,  in
accordance with the provisions of Air  Force  Instruction  36-2603  and  the
governing statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552.




                                  JOHN L. ROBUCK
                                                   Panel Chair

Exhibits:

A.  Applicant's DD Form 149 w/atchs
C.  AFBCMR Letter dated 13 July 2001
D.  AFBCMR Letter to Applicant dated 20 June 2001

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01125

    Original file (BC-2003-01125.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evaluation officer recommended the applicant receive a general discharge and not be considered for rehabilitation. 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 which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS states the applicant has not submitted any evidence nor identified...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03451

    Original file (BC-2002-03451.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03451 INDEX CODE: 102.07 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The 14 months time in grade as an E-4 that he accrued in the Army be applied towards his date of rank (DOR) in the Air National Guard (ANG). He enlisted as an Airman First Class (A1C/E-3) with a date of rank of 2 February 2001 and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00282

    Original file (BC-2004-00282.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00282 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to general. We find no evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the documentation that has been submitted in support of applicant's appeal,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02977

    Original file (BC-2002-02977.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant was warned of an impending demotion in grade from SRA to Airman First Class (A1C/E-3) as a result of his non-participation. _________________________________________________________________ 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 be reconsidered upon the submission of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02977

    Original file (BC-2002-02977.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant was warned of an impending demotion in grade from SRA to Airman First Class (A1C/E-3) as a result of his non-participation. _________________________________________________________________ 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 be reconsidered upon the submission of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02024

    Original file (BC-2003-02024.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02024 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. He was told by the Air Force that his discharge would be upgraded to honorable in six months. Therefore, based on the information and evidence provided they recommend...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0101768

    Original file (0101768.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 7 May 54, he received an undesirable discharge from the Air Force. By letter dated 27 August 2001, it was requested that the applicant provide evidence pertaining to his post-service activities (Exhibit G). Exhibit B.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03736

    Original file (BC-2002-03736.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    After reviewing the evidence of record, we believe that the applicant's enlistment in the Air National Guard in the grade of Airman Basic was in accordance with ANGI 36-2002. However, in view of the fact that the applicant accrued over 30 quarter hours of college credits by the time she graduated from high school in June 2002, we believe she should be entitled to the benefit of this achievement. JOHN L. ROBUCK Panel Chair DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON DC [pic] Office Of The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01232

    Original file (BC-2004-01232.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01232 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: DAV HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dtd 11 May 04. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dtd 14 May 04.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01262

    Original file (BC-2003-01262.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 24 August 1994, for a period of four years in the grade of airman first class (E-3). The applicant has provided no evidence showing that his assigned RE code is in error or contrary to the prevailing instruction. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence...