RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-01728
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His bad conduct discharge be upgraded.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He did not do anything bad - just went AWOL too much.
In support of his request, the applicant submits what appears to be a
section of a discharge order and a DD Form 293 (Application for the
Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United
States). The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Excluding applicant’s court-martial records, his military personnel
records were destroyed by fire in 1973.
Applicant's court-martial records reflect that he enlisted in the
Regular Air Force on 20 June 1951 for a period of four years.
On 4 March 1952, applicant was tried before a special court-martial at
Big Spring AFB, TX. He was charged with violation of Article 134,
UCMJ, Specification: he did on or about 9 Feb 52, with intent to
deceive, wrongfully and unlawfully make and utter to War Surplus
Store, a check in the amount of $10.85 without sufficient funds to
meet the payment. The applicant had two previous special court-
martial convictions for being AWOL. One prior conviction was for
being AWOL from 13 September 1951 until 8 October 1951; and, the other
conviction was for being AWOL from 9 December 1951 until 26 December
1951. On 26 March 1952, applicant was sentenced to a bad conduct
discharge, confinement at hard labor for six months and forfeiture of
$26.00 per month for six months. The convening authority approved the
sentence and, on 28 April 1952, the Air Force Board of Review affirmed
the findings and sentence.
On 7 October 1952, the applicant received a bad conduct discharge
under the provisions of AFR 39-18. He was serving in the grade of
airman basic at the time of 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:
There is no Air Force advisory opinion on this case.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF FBI REPORT:
A copy of the FBI Report was forwarded to applicant on 14 February
2002 for review. As of this date, no response has been received by
this office (Exhibit D).
_________________________________________________________________
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 carefully
considering the applicant’s submission and the available evidence of
record, we are not persuaded that his bad conduct discharge should be
upgraded. Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, other than
his own assertions, he has provided no evidence establishing that his
bad conduct discharge in 1952 was unfounded or unjust. Based upon the
presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs, it
appears that the applicant's discharge was in compliance with
appropriate directives and we find no evidence to indicate that his
separation from the Air Force was inappropriate. In view of the
foregoing, and absent persuasive evidence to the contrary, the
applicant has failed to sustain his burden of having suffered either
an error or an injustice. We therefore find no basis upon which to
favorably consider this application.
_________________________________________________________________
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 Docket Number 01-01728
in Executive Session on 3 April 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Charles E. Bennett, Panel Chair
Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Member
Mr. Thomas J. Topolski Jr., Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 Oct 01, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. FBI Identification Record - 227181D.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 14 Feb 02.
CHARLES E. BENNETT
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02247
The discharge authority approved the findings and recommendations of the Board of Officers and directed that applicant be discharged with an undesirable discharge. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 29 October 2004, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. We conclude, therefore, that the discharge...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00762
DPPRS states based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, and the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 8 September 2005 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Mr. Michael J. Exhibit B.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03458
A special court-martial was convened on 4 June 1954 in Wilmington to address the applicant’s two outstanding AWOL charges, 1 December through 12 March 1954 and 23 through 29 March 1954, where the applicant was found guilty and consequently sentenced to confinement with hard labor for six months and fined $34 per month for six months. The sentence was disapproved and the charges dismissed as the HQ Eastern Defense Force commander found that the applicant had, in fact, been discharged from...
On 19 June 1953, he was discharged from the Air Force with a bad conduct 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: The Military Personnel Management Specialist, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed the application and states the applicant had two previous summary courts- martial for being...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02048
The applicant received one character and efficiency rating of “excellent,” dated 14 January 1952. 457522F), which is at Exhibit F. On 9 August 1955, the applicant submitted a similar application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFRDB) requesting his undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. We conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances.
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...
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...
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02649 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, he requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable or general (under honorable conditions). A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03760
Based on the available documentation the following facts are provided. Now he would like to upgrade his service record. Applicant's complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. Applicant provided a statement in regards to his FBI Report stating after 1961 he found a good job and has straightened his life out.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00991
On 17 November 1952, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend him for discharge from the Air Force under the provisions of Air Force Regulation (AFR) 39-22 for a conviction by a civil court. The applicant has not shown the characterization of his discharge was contrary to the provisions of AFR 39-22, Enlisted Personnel, Disposition of Individuals Convicted by Civil Court (Exhibit D). The applicant in response to the FBI report submitted a letter clarifying the...