RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01009
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
It appears the applicant is requesting an upgrade of his
undesirable discharge.
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He received a letter from Washington DC while he was living in
Seattle WA to go before the Board to have his hearing but he did
not have the money to get to DC.
He gave seven years to the service and needs some medical help.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
___________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Prior to the period of service under review, the applicant served
honorably in the Army Air Corps from 5 Jun 45 until 29 Jun 46; the
Regular Army from 30 Jun 46 until 29 Jun 49; and the Air Force from
5 Jul 49 through 11 Aug 50.
On 12 Aug 50, he reenlisted in the Air Force in the grade of staff
sergeant for an unspecified period.
On or about 1 Apr 52, applicant was arrested by civilian
authorities and charged with forgery and held until his release to
military authorities on 14 Aug 52. He was convicted of forging and
uttering a government check and placed in military confinement from
15 Aug 52 through 7 Sep 52.
On 8 Sep 52, he was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-22,
by reason of conviction by civil court, with service characterized
as under other than honorable conditions and was issued an
undesirable discharge certificate. He was credited with 7 years,
2 months, and 29 days active service (includes 160 days of lost
time due to confinement) (total of all periods of service).
On 26 Feb 53, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB)
considered and denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his
discharge to honorable.
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, Clarksburg, WV, indicated on 17 Jul 03, that, on the
basis of data furnished, they were unable to locate an arrest
record (Exhibit C).
___________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPRS 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, nor did he
provide any facts warranting an upgrade of his discharge.
Accordingly, they recommended his records remain the same.
A complete copy of the Air Force 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 May 03 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this
date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E).
On 24 Jul 03, the applicant was invited to provide additional
evidence pertaining to his activities since leaving the service.
As of this date, no response has been received by this office
(Exhibit F).
___________________________________________________________________
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. The discharge
appears to be in compliance with the governing regulations and we
find no evidence to indicate that his separation from the Air Force
was inappropriate. We find no evidence of error in this case and
after thoroughly reviewing the documentation that has been
submitted in support of applicant’s appeal, we do not believe he
has suffered from an injustice. Additionally, we note that the
applicant has failed to provide the requested information regarding
his activities since leaving the service. Therefore, based on the
available evidence of record, we find no basis upon which 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 AFBCMR Docket Number
BC-2003-01009 in Executive Session on 6 October 2003, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Marilyn Thomas, Vice Chair
Ms. Barbara R. Murray, Member
Ms. Ann-Cecile McDermott, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Mar 03, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. FBI Report of Investigation.
Exhibit D. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 16 Apr 03.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 May 03.
Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 24 Jul 03.
MARILYN THOMAS
Vice Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01494
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01494 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 21 Oct 88, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied applicant’s request to have his discharge upgraded. ...
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 | CY2004 | BC-2003-02427
On 3 Jun 82, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge to general or honorable. On 30 Aug 82, a similar appeal was considered and denied by the Board (see Record of Proceedings at Exhibit C). A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit E. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In the applicant’s response to the evaluation,...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02035
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, WV, provided a copy of an Investigation Report pertaining to the applicant, which is at Exhibit G. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS states that due to the lack of documentation to support the applicant’s discharge process, his young age at the time, and considering the incident occurred over 45 years ago, they would not be opposed to the Board...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-03236 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge and his 25 days of lost time be removed from his records. We therefore agree with the recommendation of the Air Force that the applicant’s discharge should be upgraded to general (under...
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.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01883
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 03-01883 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS defers to the Board to determine if the applicant should be granted relief based on...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02854
The complete Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit D. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant provided a personal statement summarizing his accomplishments since leaving the service. Exhibit B. Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 25 Jan 03.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02764
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02764 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded. He was credited with 3 years, 7 months, and 4 days active service (excludes 197 days of lost time due to three periods of confinement). They also noted applicant did not...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01916
His AGO Form 01254, Transcript of Military Record, reflects his grade at the time of discharge as flight officer. The system for selecting those flight officers for commissioning will be prescribed by the theater commander….” Applicant provided an unsigned 5 Mar 46 letter from his commanding officer recommending him for appointment to second lieutenant. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachment, is at...