Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | bc-2002-04016
Original file (bc-2002-04016.doc) Auto-classification: Denied




                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-04016
            INDEX CODE:  110.02

            COUNSEL:  Jerry Berry

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  under  other  than  honorable  conditions  (UOTHC)  discharge  be
upgraded to honorable.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He never received a discharge-separation and therefore was unaware  of
the type of discharge.  Applicant contends that he had to be told that
he had an other than honorable discharge.

Applicant’s appeal is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on  10  Jan  61.   He  was
progressively promoted to the grade of Airman 3rd Class (A3C/E-2) with
an effective date and date of rank of   5 Apr 61.

The applicant was found guilty on 25 Jun 62, by Summary Court Martial,
of loitering on sentinel duty.  He was restricted to base for 30  days
and fined $55.  On 7 September 1962, he was found  guilty  by  Special
Court Martial of stealing and attempting to steal on  three  different
occasions.  He was confined at hard labor for 90 days, fined  $50  per
month for 3 months, and reduced in grade  to  Airman  Basic  (AB/E-1).
Applicant was found guilty by Summary Court Martial on 13 Feb  63  for
failure to report for duty.  He was confined to 30 days of hard  labor
and fined $40.

On 24 Jan 63, the applicant received notification that  he  was  being
recommended  for  discharge  due  to   frequent   involvement   of   a
discreditable nature with military/civil authorities.  He received  an
undesirable discharge on 2 April 1963 under the provisions of AFR  39-
10, Unfitness.  He had completed a total of 1 year, 11 months  and  11
days of active service.  He also had 101 days of lost  time.   He  was
serving in the grade of AB at the time of  discharge.   His  commander
did not recommend Probation and Rehabilitation.

The applicant acknowledged his commander’s  discharge  recommendation.
He waived his right to present matters before a board and his right to
a hearing but provided a statement on    13 February 1963 requesting a
lesser discharge than undesirable.

The applicant appealed to the Discharge Review Board (DRB) to  upgrade
his discharge.  The DRB denied  the  applicant’s  request  finding  no
compelling reason to upgrade the discharge.  (Exhibit B)

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.   DPPRS  states  that  the  applicant
provided no new information or evidence, nor did he present  facts  of
any errors or injustices that occurred during the  processing  of  his
discharge.  DPPRS states  also  that  the  discharge  was  within  the
discretion of the discharge authority  and  was  consistent  with  the
procedural and substantive requirements of discharge directives of the
time.

AFPC/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
24 January 2003 for review and comment within 30  days.   As  of  this
date, there has been no response 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  probable  error  or  injustice.    After   careful
consideration of the available evidence, we found no  indication  that
the actions taken to affect applicant’s discharge for  unfitness  were
improper or contrary to the provisions of the governing regulations in
effect at the time.  In  addition,  we  are  not  persuaded  that  the
characterization of the applicant’s discharge warrants an  upgrade  to
honorable based on the evidence of record  regarding  the  grounds  on
which the initial determination of unfitness was made.   Having  found
no error or injustice with regard to the actions that  occurred  while
the applicant was a military member, we conclude that no basis  exists
to grant favorable action on his request.


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-
2002-04016 in Executive Session on 23 April 2003, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Charles E. Bennett, Panel Chair
      Mr. William H. Anderson, Member
      Mr. James W. Russell, III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, 16 Dec 02.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 16 Jan 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Jan 03.




                                   CHARLES E. BENNETT
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0202224

    Original file (0202224.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The diagnosis was defective attitude with no evidence of classifiable psychiatric disease. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded his general discharge should be upgraded to honorable. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Aug 02 Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 6 Sep 02.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03483

    Original file (BC-2002-03483.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03483 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: American Legion HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 6 April 1987, she received another Article 15 that imposed reduction in grade to Airman Basic (AB/E-1) for two additional charges...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03705

    Original file (BC-2002-03705.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we are not persuaded that the actions taken against him were improper, contrary to the provisions of the governing regulations in effect at the time, or based on factors other than his own misconduct. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC- 2002-03705 in Executive Session on 23 April 2003, under the provisions of AFI...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03781

    Original file (BC-2005-03781.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-03781 INDEX CODE: 106.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 17 Jun 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 1963 general discharge be changed to honorable. On 10 May 63, the applicant was discharged in the grade of airman basic with a general characterization of service...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00040

    Original file (BC-2003-00040.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ 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 | CY2003 | BC-2002-03800

    Original file (BC-2002-03800.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ___________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant contracted his enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 24 February 1957. On 15 June 1960, the applicant was notified that he was being recommended for discharge due to the Air Force considering him unfit to serve further. Having found no error or injustice with regard to the actions that occurred while the applicant was a military member, we conclude that no basis exists to grant favorable...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03458

    Original file (BC-2002-03458.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A special court-martial was convened on 4 June 1954 in Wilmington to address the applicant’s two outstanding AWOL charges, 1 December through 12 March 1954 and 23 through 29 March 1954, where the applicant was found guilty and consequently sentenced to confinement with hard labor for six months and fined $34 per month for six months. The sentence was disapproved and the charges dismissed as the HQ Eastern Defense Force commander found that the applicant had, in fact, been discharged from...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01331

    Original file (BC-2006-01331.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01331 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 5 November 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect the award of the Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon (SAEMR). In view of this, the only issue before this Board is his request for the SAEMR. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02247

    Original file (BC-2004-02247.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge authority approved the findings and recommendations of the Board of Officers and directed that applicant be discharged with an undesirable discharge. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 29 October 2004, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. We conclude, therefore, that the discharge...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9903003

    Original file (9903003.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was told the ADSC for C-27 training would be lowered from three years to one year by HQ AFPC because the C-27 would be terminated from the Air Force inventory in January 1999; that this reduction was designed to make the commitment commensurate with the existence of the C-27 program; that he volunteered and was accepted for assignment to fly C-27s at Howard AB, Panama, under that understanding;...