Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02247
Original file (BC-2004-02247.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02247
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His undesirable discharge be upgraded to general.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He would like to draw Veterans Administration benefits.

In support of the appeal, applicant submitted a copy of  his  DD  Form
214.  Applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at  Exhibit
A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 12 December 1951 in the
grade of airman basic for a period of four years.

On 11 December 1952,  applicant’s  commander  recommended  appropriate
action be initiated under the provisions of AFR 39-17 to separate  him
from the Air Force for unfitness.  The basis  for  this  action:   (1)
Applicant possessed an antisocial personality manifested  by  repeated
acts of misconduct, inability to adapt to military service, poor sense
of responsibility and poor motivation for change of behavior  pattern.
(2) Applicant’s failure to report to his proper place of duty  at  the
proper time on several occasions.  (3) Absent without leave (AWOL)  on
three different occasions (2 days - [20 June 1952 to 21 June 1952], 14
days - [9 July 1952 to 22 July 1952], and 13 days - [2 October 1952 to
14 October 1952]).  (4) Applicant was  AWOL  since  Board  proceedings
were initiated and he was court-martial and confined at hard labor for
three months.  (5) Applicant was counseled by his  commanding  officer
and first sergeant on several occasions.

On 19 February 1953, applicant was notified to appear before  a  Board
of Officers to determine whether he should be discharged under AFR 39-
17.  The board convened on 20 February 1953 and recommended  applicant
be discharged with an undesirable discharge.  The discharge  authority
approved the findings and recommendations of the Board of Officers and
directed that applicant be discharged with an undesirable discharge.

Applicant was separated from the Air Force on 19 May  1953  under  the
provisions of AFR 39-17, Discharge  of  Airmen  Because  of  Unfitness
(unfitness), with an undesirable discharge.  He served 10 months and 9
days on active duty.

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:

AFPC/DPPRS states, based on the documentation on file  in  the  master
personnel records, the discharge was consistent  with  the  procedural
and  substantive  requirements  of  the  discharge  regulation.    The
discharge was  within  the  discretion  of  the  discharge  authority.
Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant’s request.

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.   On  17
November 2004, applicant was  invited  to  provide,  within  14  days,
information pertaining to his activities since  leaving  the  service.
On 30 November 2004, a copy of applicant’s FBI  Report  was  forwarded
for review and response within 14 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.  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.  We also find insufficient evidence  to  warrant  a  recommendation
that the discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency.  In  view  of
the contents of the FBI Identification Record  we  are  not  persuaded
that the characterization of the  applicant’s  discharge  warrants  an
upgrade on the basis of clemency.  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  favorably
consider 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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 1 March 2005, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                 Mr. Charles E. Bennett, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Jan Mulligan, Member
                 Ms. Carolyn B. Willis, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Sep 04, w/atch.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. FBI Report.
      Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 22 Oct 04.
      Exhibit E. Letters, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Oct 04, AFBCMR,
                       dated 17 and 30 Nov 04.




                             CHARLES E. BENNETT
                             Panel Chair





Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01465

    Original file (BC-2004-01465.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01465 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 29 October 1953, the discharge authority approved the separation recommended by the Board of Officers and directed that applicant be discharged with an undesirable discharge. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201010

    Original file (0201010.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01010 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. We also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03760

    Original file (BC-2004-03760.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Based on the available documentation the following facts are provided. Now he would like to upgrade his service record. Applicant's complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. Applicant provided a statement in regards to his FBI Report stating after 1961 he found a good job and has straightened his life out.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201479

    Original file (0201479.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2004 | BC-2004-01255

    Original file (BC-2004-01255.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ 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 | CY2001 | 0101746

    Original file (0101746.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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-2003-03923

    Original file (BC-2003-03923.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of her request, the applicant has submitted a copy of her late husband’s death certificate, and a copy of a letter from the National Personnel Records Center dated 12 November 2003. Applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors in the discharge processing, nor provide facts that support upgrading the discharge to honorable (Exhibit C). Novel, Panel Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Nov 03, with attachments.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02506

    Original file (BC-2004-02506.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 9 October 1979, the applicant received a Letter of Counseling regarding his job performance. On 17 December 1979, he was discharged under honorable conditions under the provisions of AFR 39-12 (Unsuitable - Personality Disorder). After careful consideration of the applicant’s request and the available evidence of record, we see no evidence that would warrant an upgrade of his discharge to honorable.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03100

    Original file (BC-2003-03100.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant's submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. The applicant was discharged from the Air Force on 8 November 1954 under the provisions of AFR 39-17 (unfitness) with an undesirable discharge. Second, he went AWOL one time for 30 days.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01109

    Original file (BC-2005-01109.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    For this incident, he was tried and convicted by a summary court-martial and sentenced to be confined to hard labor for 26 days, and to forfeit $50.00. On 28 December 1979, the applicant submitted an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFRDB) requesting his undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. Additionally, the applicant did not submit any evidence, identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing, or provide any facts warranting a...