Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01405
Original file (BC-2006-01405.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-01405
            INDEX CODE:  110.02

      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  11 NOVEMBER 2007


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

During the time of  the  infraction,  he  was  going  through  extreme
emotional problems that impaired his ability to serve

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 28  June  1954  in  the
grade of airman basic (E-1).  Applicant was  separated  from  the  Air
Force on 8 July 1955 under the provisions of AFR 39-17,  Discharge  of
Airman Because of Unfitness, with an undesirable  discharge.   He  was
credited with one year and five days of active duty service.

On 9 May 1955 the applicant’s  commander  notified  him  that  he  was
recommending discharge from the Air Force based on the following:

   1) 22 Nov 54, applicant failed to report back to his duty section.
   2) 24 Nov 54, applicant received  an  Article  15  for  failure  to
      report back to work.
   3) 9 Jan 55, applicant was apprehended for disorderly conduct.
   4) 22 Jan 55, applicant  received  an  Article  15  for  disorderly
      conduct on station.
   5) 21 Mar 55, applicant was apprehended by civil police for driving
      without a driver’s permit.
   6) 2 Apr 55, applicant was absent without leave (AWOL)  from  2 Apr
      55 to 4 Apr 55.
   7) 14 Apr  55,  applicant  received  a  summary  court-martial  and
      sentenced to two months hard labor and forfeiture of $40 pay for
      two months.
   8) 24 Mar 55, applicant was reported to the squadron commander  for
      dereliction of duty and verbally reprimanded.
   9) 1 Apr 55, applicant further demonstrated neglect and dereliction
      of  duties  and  responsibilities  by  failure  to  perform  bay
      orderly.
  10) Applicant was counseled and reprimanded numerous  times  by  the
      squadron  commander  and  first  sergeant  for  being  late  for
      formation, out of uniform, disorderly conduct and dereliction of
      duty.

The applicant acknowledged receipt of the  notification  of  discharge
and understood that he was  entitled  to  a  hearing  by  a  board  of
officers.  He waived his entitlement  to  appear  before  a  board  of
officers and requested discharge without benefit of board proceedings.

The discharge authority approved the separation and directed that  the
applicant be discharge with an undesirable discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  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.
The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify  any  errors  or
injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  He provided  no
facts warranting a change in his character of service.

AFPC/DPPRS complete 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
26 May 2006 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of  this  date,
no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E).

A copy of the Federal Bureau of Investigation report was forwarded  to
the applicant on 10 July 2006 for review and comment within  14  days.
As of this date, no response has been received by this office (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.  After careful  consideration  of
the evidence provided, the discharge appears to be in compliance  with
the governing manual and we find no  evidence  to  indicate  that  his
separation from the Air Force was inappropriate or that it  was  based
on any factors other than his own misconduct.  We find no evidence  of
error in this case and after thoroughly  reviewing  the  documentation
submitted in support of applicant’s appeal, we do not believe  he  has
suffered from an injustice.  In addition, in view of the  contents  of
the FBI Report of Investigation, we are not persuaded that an  upgrade
of the characterization of applicant’s discharge is warranted  on  the
basis of clemency.  Therefore, based  on  the  available  evidence  of
record, we find no basis upon which 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 Docket  Number  BC-2006-
01405 in Executive Session on 26 September 2006, under the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. James W. Russell III, Panel Chair
      Mr. Patrick C. Daugherty, Member
      Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 27 Apr 06, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  FBI Report of Investigation.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 22 May 06.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 May 06.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 10 Jul 06.




                                   JAMES W. RUSSELL III
                                   Panel Chair



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01438

    Original file (BC-2006-01438.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The board convened on 18 Mar 55 and recommended the applicant be discharged with an undesirable characterization for unfitness, and the discharge authority approved the discharge. A complete copy of the HQ AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In a letter dated 8 Jun 06, the applicant indicates he began drinking when his squadron was transferred to Japan because they had too...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02153

    Original file (BC-2002-02153.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2006 | BC-2005-03714

    Original file (BC-2005-03714.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge reflects the applicant was discharged on 31 October 1958, in the grade of AB with an under other than honorable conditions (undesirable) discharge, in accordance with Air Force Regulation 39-17 for unfitness. Applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) in 5 February 1979 to have his undesirable discharge upgraded to honorable. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02164

    Original file (BC-2004-02164.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 30 Jul 04. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Aug 04.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-03075

    Original file (BC-2006-03075.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03075 INDEX CODE: 110.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 9 APRIL 2008 ______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. In addition, he states his supervisor indicated his discharge would be automatically...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03499

    Original file (BC-2006-03499.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03499 INDEX CODE: 106.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 17 May 08 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 1988 general discharge be upgraded to honorable. The recommendation was approved on 7 Dec 88.] Although the applicant did not specifically request consideration based on clemency, we...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00146

    Original file (BC-2003-00146.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his request, the applicant submits personal statements and copies of her father’s DD Form 214 and Statement of Service. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E). After considering the evidence and testimony, the Board of Officers determined that the former member should be discharged with an undesirable discharge because of unfitness.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02066

    Original file (BC-2006-02066.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In a similar appeal, the applicant requested his BCD be upgraded to General (Under Honorable Conditions) by the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB). Additionally, the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing, and he provided no facts warranting an upgrade of her discharge. Exhibit D. Letters, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Jul 06;and, SAF/MRBC, dated 31 Aug 06.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02427

    Original file (BC-2003-02427.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2005 | BC-2004-02764

    Original file (BC-2004-02764.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02764 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded. He was credited with 3 years, 7 months, and 4 days active service (excludes 197 days of lost time due to three periods of confinement). They also noted applicant did not...