RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02263
INDEX NUMBER: 110.00
XXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None
XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The Bad Conduct Discharge he received on 1 Apr 54 be upgraded to
honorable.
________________________________________________________________
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:
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:
AFPC/DPPRS reviewed this application and recommended denial. 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 21
Sep 01 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, this
office has received no response.
___________________________________________________________________
FBI REPORT:
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI), Clarksburg, WV, provided a Report of Investigation pertaining to
applicant.
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 2 Jan 02 for
review and comment within 30 days. To date, a response has not been
received.
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. We took notice of the
applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case;
however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force
office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis
for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an
error or injustice. The Board notes that the applicant failed to
provide any information regarding his post-service activities that
would possibly justify clemency in his case. Therefore, in the absence
of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend
granting the relief sought in 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 01-02263 in
Executive Session on 14 February 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Roger E. Willmeth, Panel Chair
Ms. Nancy Wells Drury, Member
Mr. Albert J. Starnes, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 17 Aug 01.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, , dated.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated.
ROGER E. WILLMETH
Panel Chair
Applicant was discharged on 5 July 1973, in the grade of airman with an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge, under the provisions AFM 39-12 (for the good of the service). After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we are not persuaded that the applicant has been the victim of either an error or an injustice. Therefore, based on the evidence of record, we cannot conclude that clemency is warranted.
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be granted (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). Available Master Personnel Records C. Advisory Opinions D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion E. FBI Report F. AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding FBI Report
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: The Military Personnel Management Specialist, Separations Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed this application and states that the applicant did not provide evidence of error in his discharge case. However since the discharge occurred over 43 years ago and...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-01016 INDEX CODE 106.00 COUNSEL: No HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 1998 general discharge from the Air National Guard (ANG) be upgraded to honorable. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable injustice regarding the applicant’s request to have his general...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-00698 INDEX CODE: 110.00 APPLICANT (Deceased) COUNSEL: None SSN HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His late father’s under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, D.C., provided an investigative...
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...
_________________________________________________________________ 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. 3.Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 1 Oct 01.
On 23 March 1955, applicant was notified of his commander's intent to initiate discharge action against him for the following reasons: On 1 October 1952, the applicant received a summary court-martial for failure to repair and was demoted to airman basic, received 45 days’ restriction and was fined $50. On 22 June 1955, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied applicant’s request for an upgrade of his undesirable discharge to an honorable discharge. On 19 March...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR states there is no evidence in the applicant's record to substantiate that the injury he received was a direct result of enemy action. Based on the information provided, DPPPR recommends denying the applicant's request. We noted the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of his case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force and adopt their...
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: The Military Personnel Specialist, Separations Branch, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed this application and states that member’s records show he had repeated infractions and the attempts to rehabilitate him were unsuccessful. Accordingly, we recommend that the...