RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-03469
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His separation code (SDN) "246" be upgraded so that he may have access to
benefits.
Examiner's note: SDN code 246 denotes "Request for Discharge for the Good
of the Service."
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was 17 years old when he joined the Air Force, he was immature and
plagued with personal problems. After leaving the service he had a desire
to show that he had honor for our country. A desire which he pursued
through his work. Applicant lists numerous accomplishments that he has
achieved while employed by various agencies. His complete submission is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 9 Jun 64. He received
nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, of the Uniformed Code of Military
Justice (UCMJ) for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 15 through 31 Aug
64. He was reduced to the grade of airman basic and ordered into
correctional custody for 30 days. On 28 Dec 66, he received Article 15
punishment for being disorderly on station. He was reprimanded and
received a suspended reduction to the grade of airman third class. On 1
May 67, he received Article 15 punishment because he was arrested by U. S.
Customs authorities on 28 Apr 67 for illegal possession of marijuana. His
suspended reduction was vacated. On 24 Jul 67, applicant requested that he
be discharged for the good of the service under the provisions of AFM 39-12
paragraph 2-78. His request was approved by his wing commander and on
13 Sep 67, he was discharged from the Air Force and furnished an
Undesirable Discharge certificate. He served 3 years, 2 months, and 18
days on active duty.
In response to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigations
(FBI) provided a copy of an investigative report pertaining to the
applicant (see Exhibit E).
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS reviewed applicant's request and states that considering the
applicant was discharged over 34 years ago and the type of offenses,
clemency is recommended. DPPRS recommends that if a check of his FBI files
proves negative, his discharge should be upgraded to general (under
honorable conditions). His separation code should remain the same since he
did request and was discharged for the good of the service. The DPPRS
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 18 Jan
02 for review and comment within 30 days. A copy of the FBI investigative
report was forwarded to the applicant on 26 Mar 02 for review and comment
within 14 days. As of this date, this office has received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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 careful consideration of
the applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we see no
evidence of an error or injustice that would warrant a change of the
applicant's separation code or in the characterization of his service. We
agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of
primary responsibility that his separation code should remain the same
since he did in fact, voluntarily request discharge for the good of the
service. We note that the Air Force office of primary responsibility
suggested that we consider upgrading the characterization of his service to
general (under honorable conditions) on the basis of clemency. However,
given the multiplicity and nature of the offenses committed against the
good order and discipline of the service, the short period of time in which
he served, and his subsequent infractions, it is our opinion that the
characterization of his discharge was proper and in compliance with the
appropriate directives. In the absence of persuasive evidence to the
contrary, we find no basis to favorable consider his application.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown
that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to
our understanding of the issue involved. Therefore, the request for a
hearing is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
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 01-03469 in
Executive Session on 25 Apr 02, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Panel Chair
Mr. John E. Pettit, Member
Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Nov 01.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 14 Jan 02.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jan 02.
Exhibit E. FBI Investigative Report, dated 25 Jan 02.
Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Mar 02.
JOSEPH A. ROJ
Panel Chair
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 2 Jul 59 and was discharged on 20 May 63 with an undesirable discharge. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s reconstructed military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. In response to the Board's request, the FBI provided a copy of...
On 11 Sep 84, applicant was notified that his commander was recommending that he be discharged from the Air Force for drug abuse. The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. We therefore agree with the recommendation of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden that he has suffered either an error or an injustice.
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03151
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03151 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Based on his post service activities and accomplishments...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03151
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03151 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Based on his post service activities and accomplishments...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00987
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit D. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: By letter dated 5 May 05, applicant provided additional evidence as to why the character of his discharge should be upgraded. Only the Commanding Officer has the right and authority to restrict personnel to the base. ___________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The...
On 12 Apr 78, the Air Force Discharge Review Board denied an appeal from the applicant to upgrade his discharge. _______________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial of the applicant’s request. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant indicates in his response that the Air Force evaluation contained an error,...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02895
Applicant has also requested that his discharge be upgraded to honorable. After reviewing applicant’s overall record of service and based on the fact that under today’s standards he would receive an honorable discharge, we recommend approval of his request for an upgrade of his discharge. Show that on 26 April 1957, he was honorably discharged in the grade of master sergeant and furnished an Honorable Discharge Certificate.
_________________________________________________________________ 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 at Exhibit D. Pursuant to the Board's request for information, the FBI indicated that, on the basis of the evidence provided, they were unable to locate an arrest record pertaining to the applicant (Exhibit C). The applicant met...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02114
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 5 Aug 05 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 28 Jul 05. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Aug 05.
The applicant was discharged on 14 Apr 70. We find no evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we do not believe he has suffered from an injustice. _________________________________________________________________ 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...