RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02576
INDEX NUMBER: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His undesirable discharge be upgraded to general under honorable
conditions discharge.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He refused a direct order. He was only 22 years old and he thought at
that age he didn’t need to be told what to do, because he thought he
knew everything. He’s much older now and realizes that he only hurt
himself.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Prior to the enlistment under review, the applicant served in the
Regular Air Force from 21 Apr 52 to 30 Dec 54. He reenlisted on 31
Dec 54; he spent 2 years, 5 months and 21 days in Hawaii. During this
enlistment, he was promoted to the grade of airman first class (A1C/E-
4). His grade at time of discharge was airman third class (A3C/E-2).
The pertinent facts leading up to the applicant’s discharge are
contained in the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) Examiner’s
brief at Exhibit B.
On 26 Jul 57, applicant acknowledged receipt of the administrative
discharge action and waived his entitlement to appear before a board
of officers and requested discharge in lieu of board proceedings. He
further acknowledged that he understood that if his application was
approved, that his separation could be under conditions other than
honorable and that he could receive an undesirable discharge, and that
this may deprive him of rights as a veteran under both federal and
state legislation.
On 23 Aug 57, he was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-17 by
reason of unfitness, with an undesirable discharge. He was credited
with 5 years, 4 months and 2 days of active service.
On 6 October 1958, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) found
that neither evidence of record, nor that provided by the applicant,
substantiated an inequity or impropriety which would justify a change
in the discharge (see AFDRB Hearing Record at Exhibit B).
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 Separation Procedures Section, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed the
applicant’s request and found that the discharge was consistent with
the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge
regulation. Additionally, that the discharge was within the sound
discretion of the discharge authority. They also noted that the
applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or
injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. Considering the
discharge occurred over 44 years ago and the type of offenses, they
recommend clemency. They also recommended that if the FBI files prove
negative, that the applicant’s discharge be upgraded to under
honorable conditions (general).
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 2
November 01 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date,
no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E).
On 29 January 2002, a copy of the FBI report was forwarded to the
applicant for comment. At that time, the applicant was also invited
to provide additional evidence pertaining to his activities since
leaving the service (Exhibit F). As of this date, no response has
been received by this office.
_________________________________________________________________
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 error or injustice. After reviewing the
circumstances surrounding applicant’s involuntary separation, we find
no evidence to indicate that the type of discharge he received was in
error or unjust. We note that the Air Force recommended, provided his
FBI report was negative, that his discharge be upgraded to under
honorable conditions (general) based on clemency. However, based on
the contents of the FBI report and the absence of the requested
information regarding his activities since leaving the service, we are
not persuaded that an upgrade of the characterization of the
applicant’s discharge is warranted on the basis of clemency. Based on
the foregoing, we find no basis to favorably consider this
application.
_________________________________________________________________
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 newly
discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application AFBCMR
Docket Number 01-02576 in Executive Session on 2 April 2002, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Panel Chair
Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Member
Mr. Robert S. Boyd, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 Sep 01, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. FBI Report of Investigation
Exhibit D. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 16 Oct 01.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 Nov 01, w/atchs.
Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Jan 02, w/atchs.
PATRICIA D. VESTAL
Panel Chair
In support of his appeal, the applicant submitted a letter of character reference from his pastor and deacon board; a copy of his DD Form 214, Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States and his Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) Hearing record. Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. He also states that when he was discharged, he was told that in six months his discharge would be upgraded.
On 21 Feb 57, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force in the grade of airman basic under the provisions of AFR 39-17 (Unfitness) with an undesirable discharge. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Military Personnel Management Specialist, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed this application and indicated that the applicant did not identify any specific errors in the discharge proceedings nor provide facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge he received. Exhibit B.
At that time, the applicant was also invited to provide additional evidence pertaining to his activities since leaving the service (Exhibit G). After careful consideration of the available facts contained in the Air Force Discharge Review Board brief surrounding the applicant’s discharge, we find no impropriety in the characterization of the applicant’s discharge. Exhibit B.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00146
In support of his request, the applicant submits personal statements and copies of her father’s DD Form 214 and Statement of Service. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E). After considering the evidence and testimony, the Board of Officers determined that the former member should be discharged with an undesirable discharge because of unfitness.
On 6 Feb 58, the commander recommended the applicant be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-22 (Conviction by Civil Court) with an undesirable discharge. Considering that the discharge occurred over 43 years ago and the type of offense committed by the applicant, the appropriate office of the Air Force has indicated that they would recommend clemency if a check of the FBI files proves negative. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 Nov 01.
On 10 Aug 53, he was reduced to the grade of Airman 3rd Class under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ, for failure to report at appointed time to his place of duty and making a false statement. On 25 Oct 54, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (DRB) examined and reviewed the applicant’s request for discharge upgrade and concluded that the evidence submitted was insufficient to warrant a change in the type or nature of his discharge, and accordingly denied his request (see Exhibit C). ...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02418
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 0202418 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded so he can be buried in a national cemetery. AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant's sister...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00596
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00596 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. His sentence consisted of reduction to the grade of airman basic (AB/E-1), 30 days of confinement at hard labor and forfeiture of $30. On 8 Sep 59, the Air Force Discharge...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00047
On 31 July 1995, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied applicant’s request that his discharge be upgraded. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicant’s complete submission, we find no evidence of error or injustice. We also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01387
The applicant, while serving in the grade of airman basic, was separated from the Air Force on 30 March 1956 under the provisions of AFR 39-17 (Unfitness) with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge. The Air Force Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s upgrade request to reenlist on 20 March 1959. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...