RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00747
INDEX CODE: 110.02
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
XXXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 4 SEP 06
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
There is no injustice in his discharge and he got what he deserved. Seven
of his eight brothers saw combat and he asked to go overseas many times so
he could follow in their footsteps but his requests were denied. These
denials lead to his minor infractions. He and his eight brothers will have
their names carved on a stone in the park on Memorial Day. After all these
years, he is asking for a pardon.
In support of his application, applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214
and a letter from the Department of Veterans Affairs. A copy of the
applicant’s submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 25 August 1954, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force in the
grade of airman basic (E-1) for a period of 4 years. He was progressively
promoted to the grade of airman first class (E-3), with a date of rank of 2
November 1954.
From 29 January 1956 to 14 February 1956, he was charged with Absent
Without Leave (AWOL). For this incident, he was tried and convicted by a
summary court-martial. He was reduced to the grade of basic airman,
sentenced to confinement for 30 days and to forfeit thirty-five dollars
($35) of his pay.
From 12 May 1956 to 30 May 1956, he was charged with AWOL. For this
incident, he was tried and convicted by a summary court-martial. He was
ordered to perform hard labor for 45 days and to forfeit fifty-two dollars
($52) of his pay.
On 19 June 1956, the applicant was tried by a Summary Court-martial for
failure to go at the prescribed time to his appointed place of duty.
On 25 July 1956, discharge proceedings were initiated against the applicant
under the provisions of AFR 39-17 (Unfitness). The applicant was advised
of his rights in the matter and that an undesirable discharge would be
recommended. After consulting military legal counsel, the applicant waived
his right to a hearing before a board of officers and declined to submit
statements in his own behalf. The applicant further indicated he
understood that if an undesirable discharge was approved, his discharge
would be under conditions other than honorable. The discharge case file
was reviewed and found legally sufficient on 30 July 1956. On 1 August
1956, the discharge authority approved the recommended separation and
directed the applicant be issued an Undesirable Discharge certificate. On
3 August 1956, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-
17 (Unfitness), with an undesirable discharge. He was credited with 1
year, 10 months and 6 days of total active service. Time lost was 34 days
due to AWOL and confinement.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied. DPPRS states that based
on the documentation on file in his personnel records, the discharge was
consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the
discharge regulation. The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 20 May 2005, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was sent to the
applicant for review and comment. As of this date, this office has not
received a response.
_________________________________________________________________
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. The applicant did not provide
persuasive evidence showing the information in the discharge case was
erroneous, his substantial rights were violated, or that his commanders
abused their discretionary authority. The characterization of discharge
which was issued at the time of the applicant’s separation accurately
reflects the circumstances of his separation and we do not find the
characterization of discharge to be in error or unjust. In view of the
foregoing and in the absence of evidence by the applicant attesting to a
successful post-service adjustment in the years since his separation, we
are not inclined to extend clemency in this case. Therefore, in the
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which to
recommend favorable action on 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 10 August 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Michael J. Novel, Panel Chair
Ms. Jan Mulligan, Member
Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR
Docket Number BC-2005-00747:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Apr 05.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 12 May 05.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 May 05.
MICHAEL J. NOVEL
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00289
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00289 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 28 JULY 2006 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). DPPRS states that based upon the documentation in the file, the discharge was...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01109
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00467
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00467 INDEX CODE: 110.00 XXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 13 AUGUST 2006 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. He was reduced to the grade of airman basic with a date of rank of 20 September...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00130
He was again placed in confinement until 19 April 1954. The discharge authority approved the recommended separation and directed that the applicant be discharged with an undesirable discharge. DPPRS states the applicant’s discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation in affect at that time and was within the discretion of the discharge authority.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00749
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00749 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 04 SEPTEMBER 2006 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (undesirable) discharge be upgraded. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02329
He received an Article 15, dated 11 January 1956, for failure to go to his place of duty. _________________________________________________________________ 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 following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC- 2005-02329 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form...
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 | CY2006 | BC-2005-03716
The commander advised the applicant of his right to board action and if he desired to make an application for discharge in lieu of board action. On 9 November 1955, the applicant was notified to appear before a board of officers to hear evidence and to make recommendations as to his retention in the Air Force. On 15 November 1955, the board of officers convened and recommended the applicant be discharged from the Air Force for unfitness and that he receive an undesirable discharge.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03923
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.
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).