RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02121
INDEX CODE:110.00
Applicant COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He feels the discharge was unjust. He has lived for 48 years with the
discharge. During this time he has been self-employed as a painter and
raised three children as a single parent. As a proud parent and a good
citizen of his hometown for all these years, he would like to change this
most embarrassing incident.
In support of his submission, the applicant submits a personal statement
and copies of his discharge certificates (Exhibit A).
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant’s records were, for the most part, destroyed and efforts at
reconstruction have been unsuccessful.
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.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Separations Branch, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed the application and states
that the applicant did not identify any specific errors in the discharge
processing. However, considering the discharge occurred over 44 years ago,
the type of offense, his young age and immaturity, DPPRS recommends
clemency if a check of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) files
proves negative (Exhibit C).
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation
provided a copy of an Investigative Report (FBI No. 890324C) which is at
Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and the FBI investigative
report and provided his explanation concerning the entries on the report
(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. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of probable error or injustice. Even though the applicant has
provided no evidence to show that his discharge was improper or not in
compliance with appropriate directives, it is our opinion that approval
of some relief is warranted in this case. It appears likely that he has
led a stable and productive life and it appears that there is no evidence
that he has had any subsequent serious involvement of a derogatory nature
since his separation from the Air Force. In light of the above, we
believe that it would be an injustice for him to continue to suffer the
adverse effects of an undesirable discharge. Therefore on the basis of
clemency, we believe an upgrade of his discharge to general (under
honorable conditions) is warranted. His request for upgrade to honorable
was considered; however, in the absence of evidence by the applicant
other than his own statements pertaining to the quality of his service,
the facts and circumstances surrounding his separation, or his activities
since leaving the service, we do not believe that an upgrade to a fully
honorable discharge is warranted. Accordingly, we recommend that his
records be corrected as indicated below.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating
to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 29 March 1957, he was discharged
with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions).
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive
Session on 24 October 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Henry Romo, Jr., Panel Chair
Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Member
Mr. James W. Russell, III, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The following
documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 Jul 01 w/atchs.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 17 Aug 01.
Exhibit D. FBI Investigation Report #890324C
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 24 Aug 01, and AFBCMR, dated 19
Sep 01.
Exhibit F. Applicant’s Response undated.
HENRY ROMO, JR.
Panel Chair
On 23 April 1963, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied applicant’s appeal for an upgrade of his discharge (Exhibit B). Accordingly, they recommend his records remain the same. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we find no impropriety in the characterization of applicant's discharge.
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Military Personnel Management Specialist, Separation Branch, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed the application and states that the applicant provided no evidence indicating that he was the victim of an error or an injustice. DPPRS recommends that since the...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01970 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His dishonorable discharge be upgraded. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states that other than going AWOL, he has a clean service record. Considered alone, we conclude...
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. The Special Programs & AFBCMR Manager, HQ AFPC/DPPAES, also evaluated the case and explains why they corrected the applicant’s RE code from “3A” to “2N.” However, if the relief sought is granted, then the author recommends the applicant’s RE code be changed to “3K” (“Reserved for use by HQ AFPC or the AFBCMR when no other RE code applies or is inappropriate [sic].” [The definition for “3K” provided by DPPAES is incorrect because that meaning...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Assistant NCOIC, Separation Procedures Section, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed applicant’s request and states that considering the discharge was almost 30 years ago, the type of offenses committed, and the fact that the member received a psychiatrist’s recommendation that he should have been administratively separated, clemency is recommended. Applicant indicated that she does not wish to provide a response to...
The commander, on 25 Jun 56, determined that applicant was guilty of the offenses and imposed punishment consisting of a reduction to the grade of airman first class (permanent) and a reprimand. The commander, on 12 Jul 56, determined that applicant was guilty of the offenses and imposed punishment consisting of reduction to the grade of airman second class (permanent) and a reprimand. Should he provide such evidence (as relayed in our letter), of good conduct for the period of time which...
A similar appeal was considered and denied by the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) on 4 October 1993 (Exhibit F) . The applicant provided additional new evidence pertaining to his post-service activities for possible reconsideration of his application (Exhibit G ) . 1552. r Exhibit F. Record of Proceedings, dated 4 Oct 93 Exhibit G. Letter from applicant, undated, with Exhibit H. FBI Investigative Report, PCN 980446910621 additional evidence Panel Chair V
The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s available limited military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS states based upon the lack of...
Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A. Pursuant to the Board’s request of 10 December 1998, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided a copy of an investigation report, which is attached at Exhibit C. The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit D) The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit E). On 14...
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...