RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02895
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general discharge be upgraded to honorable and his grade of
master sergeant be reinstated.
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He has no other evidence to furnish, since he knows of no witnesses
that would know what happened to him. The only witness was a
troubleshooter from the bank that picked up his car in Arkansas,
but he passed away long ago. During his court-martial, he had
asked the military attorney to call the witness to have him
testify, but he said there was no need because they were only going
to reduce him one grade and that he could go back to work. He did
not even call any character witnesses, which he had plenty.
In support of his appeal, applicant provided his personal
statements; a copy of his special court-martial proceedings; a copy
of his letter to his Congressman, dated 13 Apr 02; a letter from
his Congressman, dated 19 Jun 02; and copies of DD Forms 214,
Report of Separation, dated 13 Jul 53, 25 Jul 56, and 26 Apr 57.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
___________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 18 Jul 40, applicant enlisted in the Regular Army (Air Corps/AC)
in the grade of private. He was honorably discharged on 9 Aug 45
in the grade of technical sergeant and was credited with 5 years
and 18 days of active duty service. He enlisted in the Army Air
Corps on 30 Oct 45 for a period of three years. He had continuous
honorable service and was promoted to the grade of master sergeant
on 1 Jun 55. Applicant entered his last enlistment on 26 Jul 56
for a period of six years.
On 22 Jan 57, applicant was convicted by Special Court-Martial for
being absent without leave (AWOL) from 4 Nov to 22 Nov 56. His
punishment consisted of a reduction in grade to airman first class
and 90 days of confinement at hard labor (CHL).
On 22 Apr 57, applicant applied for a hardship discharge for
financial reasons, under the provisions of AFR 39-13. The Asst
Adjutant approved his application on 23 Apr 57. On that same date,
the unexecuted portion of the CHL was remitted.
On 26 Apr 57, he was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-13,
SDN 227, by reason of hardship, with service characterized as
general under honorable conditions. He was credited with 7 months,
and 15 days active service (excludes 48 days of lost time due to
AWOL and confinement). Applicant’s total service for pay was
16 years, 5 months, and 5 days. His grade at the time of discharge
was airman first class, with an effective date and date of rank of
26 Mar 57.
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:
HQ AFPC/DPPRS found that the discharge was consistent with the
procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation
in effect at the time. 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 nor
did he provide any facts warranting an upgrade of his discharge.
However, based on his past honorable wartime service and if he was
separated today for the same reason, “Hardship,” he would receive
an honorable discharge. They would not be opposed to upgrading his
characterization if a search of the FBI file does not reveal any
subsequent convictions.
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Applicant provided a personal statement explaining the events which
took place during his military career and since leaving the
service. He described his professional as well as personal family
accomplishments. In support of his appeal, he submitted several
documents to substantiate his accomplishments since leaving the
service, along with letters of character reference and a copy of a
previous request for enlistment (during the 1960 timeframe) to his
Congressman.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit G.
___________________________________________________________________
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 an injustice. In this regard, we note that the
applicant was convicted by Special Court-Martial for being absent
without leave (AWOL) for 18 days. In view of the circumstances
surrounding applicant’s absence from duty, the majority of the
Board believes that his reduction from the grade of master sergeant
to airman first class is unduly harsh. It appears that the
applicant went AWOL because his family, wife and nine children,
were having financial problems and his wife’s health was not good.
While we do not condone his misconduct, the majority of the Board
believes that under the circumstances, his reduction in grade was
harsh. Therefore, the majority of Board recommends that so much of
the punishment, as pertains to his reduction in grade, be set
aside.
4. Applicant has also requested that his discharge be upgraded to
honorable. Prior to the period of service under review, we note he
had five previous enlistments for which he received honorable
discharges and had served during WWII and the Korean War. The Air
Force, in response to the applicant’s request, states that if he
was separated today for the same reason, “Hardship,” he would
receive an honorable discharge and, based on his prior honorable
wartime service, they are not opposed to upgrading his discharge.
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.
___________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to:
a. Set aside so much of the punishment of Special Court
Martial Order No. --, dated 18 April 1957, Headquarters, Crew
Training Air Force, (ATC), Randolph AFB TX, as pertains to his
reduction from master sergeant to airman first class.
b. Show that on 26 April 1957, he was honorably discharged
in the grade of master sergeant and furnished an Honorable
Discharge Certificate.
___________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number
BC-2002-02895 in Executive Session on 7 May 2003, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Joseph G. Diamond, Panel Chair
Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Member
Ms. Dorothy P. Loeb, Member
All members of the Board voted to grant the applicant’s request to
have his general under honorable conditions discharge upgraded to
honorable. The majority of the Board voted to discharge the
applicant in the grade of master sergeant. Mr. Diamond voted to
deny the applicant’s request to have the grade of master sergeant
reinstated. The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 2 Sep 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. FBI Report of Investigation.
Exhibit D. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 10 Oct 02.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Oct 02.
Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 7 Jan 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit G. Letter, Applicant, dated 20 Jan 03, w/atchs.
JOSEPH G. DIAMOND
Panel Chair
AFBCMR BC-2002-02895
MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF
Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air
Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the
authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat
116), it is directed that:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to:
a. Set aside so much of the punishment of Special
Court Martial Order No. --, dated 18 April 1957, Headquarters, Crew
Training Air Force (ATC), Randolph AFB, Texas, as pertains to his
reduction from master sergeant to airman first class.
b. Show that on 26 April 1957, he was honorably
discharged in the grade of master sergeant and furnished an
Honorable Discharge Certificate.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02327
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit D. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 12 Aug 05, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). Were you provided a response on a timely basis? No c. Could be improved d. N/A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS The Record of Proceedings (ROP) contains a summary of your request, your contentions, the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02855
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02855 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). On 10 Sep 57, the discharge authority approved the Discharge for Unfitness. Having found insufficient evidence of an error or injustice with regard to the...
He recommended that applicant be discharged from the service. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant indicated that he is now retired and a member of the American Legion. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Mar 02, w/atchs.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00457
One previous conviction was considered in this case. He was credited with 2 years, 4 months, and 3 days of active military service (excludes 151 days lost time due to confinement). The discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02164
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. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 30 Jul 04. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Aug 04.
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03581
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: HQ AFPC/DPPRS reviewed this application and found that based on the documentation in the file, they believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. However, based on the offense,...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00737 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). In response, he provided a letter that is appended at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02240
On 23 Jun 58, the Air Force Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for a discharge upgrade. Considered alone, we conclude the discharge proceedings were proper and the characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances. Therefore, the Board Majority recommends the applicant’s discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions) as a matter of equity and on the basis of clemency.
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 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.