RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03899
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general, under honorable conditions, discharge be upgraded to
honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The Veteran’s Administration (VA) told him that an upgrade to
honorable could be obtained by request.
His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 3 January 1957. He
was progressively promoted to the grade of A/3C (E-2) with a date of
rank of 17 July 1958.
On 27 May 1958, applicant violated regulations by improper wearing of
the fatigue uniform. His pass privileges were revoked for a two-week
period. Applicant received an Article 15 on 11 June 1958 for entering
Mexico without valid leave orders and was reduced in grade to Airman
Basic (AB/E-1).
Applicant received notification on 2 October 1958 that he was being
recommended for discharge due to unsuitability. He waived his right
to submit a rebuttal to the discharge authority and concurred with the
recommendation of his commander. He received a general discharge with
service characterization of under honorable conditions under the
provisions of AFR 39-16, Discharge of Airmen During Their First
Enlistment. He had served a total of 1 year, 8 months and 13 days (18
days of lost time), and was serving in the grade of A/3C at the time
of discharge.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial noting that the applicant provided no
evidence to support his claim. Nor did the applicant identify any
errors or injustices that may have occurred during the processing of
his discharge. DPPRS states that the discharge was consistent with
the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge
regulation and that it was within the sound discretion of the
discharge authority.
DPPRS’s 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 April 2003 for review and comment within 30 days. 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. We find no impropriety in the
characterization of applicant's discharge. It appears that
responsible officials applied appropriate standards in effecting the
separation, and we do not find persuasive evidence that pertinent
regulations were violated or that applicant was not afforded all the
rights to which entitled at the time of discharge. We conclude,
therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and
characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing
circumstances.
4. Because the applicant has provided no documentation concerning
post-service conduct, the Board finds nothing to warrant an upgrade of
his discharge on the basis of clemency. However, should he provide
statements from community leaders and acquaintances attesting to his
good character and reputation and other evidence of successful post-
service rehabilitation, this Board will reconsider this case based on
the new evidence. We cannot, however, recommend approval based on the
current evidence of record.
_________________________________________________________________
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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2002-03899 in Executive Session on 5 June 2003, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Robert S. Boyd, Panel Chair
Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Member
Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 Mar 03.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 10 Apr 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Apr 03.
ROBERT S. BOYD
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00970
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00970 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general, under honorable conditions, discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial noting that the applicant did...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00898
The Board recommended an undesirable discharge with no Probation and Rehabilitation (P&R) that the discharge authority approved on 25 October 1972. As of this date, no response has been received by this office. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00957
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial noting that the applicant did not identify any errors or injustices during the processing of his discharge. We conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03283
_______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He used drugs at a going away party before he entered service and has not used drugs since that time. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 14 Feb 03...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00040
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Most of the applicant’s records were destroyed in the Jul 73 fire at the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC). Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report, which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS provided their rationale for...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01327
On 6 Mar 95, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request that his BCD be upgraded to general. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). A complete copy of the AFLSA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 9 Sep 04 for review and response.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00437
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00437 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “2C” be changed to allow his enlistment into either the Army or Air Force. On 19 June 1998, he received an uncharacterized entry-level separation under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Fraudulent Entry into...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03707
The applicant was afforded all rights granted by statute and regulation and we find no evidence that the commander abused his discretionary authority when he initiated the discharge action. Applicant has provided no evidence showing that her separation was in error or unjust, therefore, we conclude that no basis exists to grant favorable action on her request. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number...
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,...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03756
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03756 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2C be changed to 3K, and the narrative reason for separation be changed from “Personality Disorder” to “Secretarial Authority.” _________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT...