RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03100
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His undesirable discharge be upgraded.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was 16 years old and was not making enough money to feed his
family.
In support of the appeal, applicant submits a personal statement.
Applicant's submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 18 October 1951, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force
with his mother’s consent in the grade of private for a period of four
years. His age at enlistment was 17 years and 20 days. The highest
rank attained by the applicant was A/3C (E-2). Evidence in the record
indicates that the applicant first applied for a Class Q Allotment for
his spouse in July 1953. According to the applicant’s DD Form 214, he
was reduced to the grade of airman basic on 28 July 1954. During his
service, his character and efficiency were rated “excellent” on 1
December 1951 and 15 December 1951. His character and efficiency were
rated “good” and “satisfactory,” respectively, on 15 June 1952 and 19
February 1954. His character and efficiency were rated “poor” and
“unsatisfactory” on 8 November 1954.
The applicant was convicted by a Summary Court-Martial for being
absent without leave (AWOL) 11-30 March 1952 and was confined at hard
labor for 30 days and fined $25. He was convicted by a Special Court-
Martial for being AWOL from 3 September to 3 October 1952 and was
confined at hard labor for three months and fined $126. He received
another Summary Court-Martial for being AWOL 2-28 July 1954 and was
confined at hard labor for 30 days and fined $28.
On 23 September 1954, the applicant’s commander initiated a statement
recommending that the applicant be discharged under the provisions of
AFR 39-17 because of unfitness. On 5 October 1954, after consulting
military legal counsel, he waived his entitlement to appear before a
board and requested to be discharged without the benefit of board
proceedings. The discharge authority approved his request for
separation on 2 November 1954. The discharge authority directed that
the applicant be discharged with an undesirable discharge.
The applicant was discharged from the Air Force on 8 November 1954
under the provisions of AFR 39-17 (unfitness) with an undesirable
discharge. He had served 2 years, 7 months and 20 days on active
duty. Time lost was 151 days due to AWOL and confinement.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provided a copy of an
investigative report pertaining to the applicant, which is at Exhibit
E.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRSP states that 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. Therefore, they recommend a denial of the
applicant’s request.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Applicant states that in his late years he feels like he was done
wrong on the facts. To start off he was 16 years old when he joined
the Air Force. His birthday had to be changed so that he could clear
his social security, 9/28/34. Second, he went AWOL one time for 30
days. His pay was $73.00 a month. He could not feed his family on
this pay.
Applicant's complete response, with attachments, is at 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. 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
and adopt their rationale as the basis for the conclusion that the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no
compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in 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 this application in
Executive Session on 14 January 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Panel Chair
Mr. Charlie E. Williams, Jr., Member
Ms. Ann-Cecile McDermott, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, undated, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRSP, dated 20 Oct 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Oct 03.
Exhibit E. FBI Report.
Exhibit F. Applicant’s Response, undated, w/atchs.
ROSCOE HINTON, JR.
Panel Chair
For this incident, he was ordered to be restricted to the limits of his squadron area for a period of sixty (60) days and to forfeit fifty dollars ($50) of his pay. On 19 November 1954, 3 August 1955 and 23 June 1958, the Air Force Discharge Review Board considered and denied the applicant’s requests for a discharge upgrade. On 12 July 2002, a letter from Congressman Markey’s office requesting assistance in upgrading applicant’s discharge was received by this office (Exhibit G).
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01066
On 20 March 1981, the applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB), requesting that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice warranting the award of the Air Force Overseas (Long and Short) Tour Ribbons, Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon, Air Force Outstanding Unit Award, Combat Readiness Medal, and Armed Forces Service Medal. We took notice of the...
On 19 February 1954, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-17 (Unfitness), with an undesirable discharge. We note that the applicant provided some character references pertaining to his post-service activities; however, the Board does not believe this evidence is sufficient to warrant clemency. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 5 December 2001, under...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03194
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03194 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. He had completed a total of 1 year, 1 month and 17 days and was serving in the grade of airman basic at the time of discharge. ROBERT S. BOYD Panel Chair AFBCMR...
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02418
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 0202418 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded so he can be buried in a national cemetery. AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant's sister...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01255
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 3 February 1951, the former member enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the age of 18 in the grade of airman basic (E-1) for a period of four (4) years. On 12 December 1955, the former member submitted an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFRDB) requesting his undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ The...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02048
The applicant received one character and efficiency rating of “excellent,” dated 14 January 1952. 457522F), which is at Exhibit F. On 9 August 1955, the applicant submitted a similar application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFRDB) requesting his undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. We conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances.
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 | CY2002 | BC-2002-03096
He had served 8 years, 7 months, and 26 days on active duty. DPPRS states that based on the offense and the fact that it occurred more than 42 years ago, they recommend his discharge be upgraded to under honorable conditions (general), if his FBI files prove negative. ROSCOE HINTON JR. Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2002-03096 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...