RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02105
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He needs help from the VA hospital due to his bad health.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 26 November 1951 for a
term of four years. He was discharged from the Air Force on 8 October 1954
under the provisions of AFR 39-17 (unfitness) and received an undesirable
discharge. He served 2 years, 10 months and 13 days of total active
military service.
On 13 August 1954, the applicant’s commander notified him he was
recommending him to appear before a Board of Officers. Action had been
initiated by his former commander, but was not completed before his
departure due to a delay in obtaining supporting documents. Applicant was
convicted by a civil court on charges of unlawful cohabitation and
sentenced to 30 days in county jail. He received two Articles 15 in July
and August 1954 for failure to repair and was convicted by a Summary Court-
Martial on 12 August 1954 for failure to go on 11 August 1954 to his
appointed place of duty. He was confined at hard labor for 30 days and
forfeiture of $34. After consultation with legal counsel, he waived his
entitlement to appear before a Board and requested discharge. He stated he
understood he could receive an under other than honorable discharge and
subsequently may not be eligible for benefits as a Veteran. The Discharge
Authority approved the discharge on 4 September 1954 and ordered an
undesirable discharge. He had 53 days of lost time.
_________________________________________________________________
AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial. Based upon the documentation in the file,
they believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural and
substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. Additionally, the
discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority. The
applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or
injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. He provided no facts
warranting an upgrade of his discharge. Accordingly, DPPRS recommends his
records remain the same. He has not filed a timely request.
AFPC/DPPRS complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant
on 22 July 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 an error or injustice. After a thorough review of the
evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that
his discharge should be upgraded. We find no impropriety in the
characterization of the 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 the 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.
_________________________________________________________________
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 Docket Number BC-2003-02105
in Executive Session on 3 September 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Panel Chair
Mr. Jackson A. Hauslein, Member
Mr. James W. Russell, III, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 Jun 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Available Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 22 Jul 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Aug 03.
BRENDA L. ROMINE
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01482
He received an honorable discharge on May 20, 1957 in order to reenlist in the Air Force at which time he corrected his date of birth. He was discharged as an A/2c and was told that he would receive a general discharge. Based on documentation provided by the applicant, he was discharged on 29 May 1958 with an undesirable discharge.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02160
The Discharge Authority approved the discharge on 25 October 1973 and ordered a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that the findings of the Administrative Discharge Board should be set aside and his discharge upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2003- 02160 in...
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-2003-00588
The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluation and the FBI report were forwarded to the applicant on 21 March 2003 and 21 April 2003 for review and comment (Exhibits D and G). Exhibit B. Exhibit F. FBI Record MD0SI0100, dated 8 Apr 03.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00148
On 18 October 1957, the discharge authority approved the recommended separation and directed that the applicant be discharged with an undesirable discharge. He had served 2 years and 24 days on active duty. Additionally, the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02153
Based on the limited documentation in the applicant’s file, they found that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation in effect at the time of his discharge. The complete 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 22 Aug 03 for review and comment within...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01204
Also USPS says that they have no record of his military time. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS deferred to the Board to determine if the applicant should be granted relief based on limited supporting documentation in his record. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Jul 03.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02655
On 13 Aug 70, the base commander recommended approval of an undesirable discharge. On 18 Aug 70, the discharge authority approved an undesirable discharge and directed that the applicant be issued a DD Form 258AF, “Undesirable Discharge Certificate.” On 24 Aug 70, applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFM 39-12, with service characterized as other than honorable. Having found insufficient evidence of an error or injustice with regard to the actions that occurred while...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01860
Members of the Board, Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Ms. Barbara J. White- Olson and Ms. Marcia J. Bachman, considered this application on 13 August 2003. BRENDA L. ROMINE Panel Chair Attachments: 1. FBI Report AFBCMR BC-2003-01860 INDEX CODE: 110.00 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code, Air Force Instruction 36-2603, and having assured compliance with the provisions of the above regulation, the decision of the Air Force Board...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | bc-2003-02394
He was honorably discharged from the DEP on 12 April 1967, after completing 3 months and 3 days of inactive service. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that unfortunately the applicant cannot be credited with time he did not serve. The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...