RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01848
INDEX CODE: 110.02
xxxxxxxxxxxxx COUNSEL: NOT INDICATED
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 16 JAN 2008
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general (under honorable
conditions) discharge.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He should have received a general discharge.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The former member enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic
on 22 June 1951, for a term of 4 years. On 18 November 1953, his
commander recommended he appear before a Board of officers to
determine whether or not he should be discharged prior to expiration
of his term of service due to unfitness. The basis for the
commander’s recommendation was that applicant had given evidence of
undesirable habits or traits of character such as thievery in the
barracks. He committed a number of petty offenses and did not obey
orders from his superiors. He was court-martialed on two separate
occasions. He acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge
and after consulting with counsel 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 he be discharged with an undesirable discharge. On
29 March 1954, he was discharged from the Air Force under the
provisions of AFR 39-17, Discharge of Airmen Because of Unfitness,
with an undesirable discharge. He served a total of two years, four
months and three days of active duty service.
Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Clarksburg, WV, provided a copy of an Investigation Report purportedly
pertaining to the applicant, which is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial. 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, the applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify
any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing,
nor did he provide any facts warranting a change to his character of
service.
The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant’s daughter pleads to the Board for clemency on behalf of
her terminally ill father. She states she needs funds to bury him.
_________________________________________________________________
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. Evidence has not been provided
to show the applicant's discharge was erroneous or unjust. The
applicant's discharge was based on his special court-martial
conviction. While we are precluded by law from reversing a court-
martial conviction, we are authorized to correct the records to
reflect actions taken by reviewing officials and to take action on the
sentence of a military court based on clemency. However, the
applicant has not provided information of post-service activities and
accomplishments for us to conclude that he has overcome the behavioral
traits which caused the discharge. In this respect, we note that
insufficient evidence has been presented to warrant a recommendation
that the discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency. Therefore,
based on the available evidence of record, we find no basis upon which
to favorably consider 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 Docket Number BC-2006-
01848 in Executive Session on 26 October 2006, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Michael J. Novel, Panel Chair
Mr. Todd L. Schafer, Member
Ms. Mary C. Puckett, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 13 Jun 06, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. FBI Investigative Report, dated 17 Jul 06.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 30 Jun 06.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated,.14 Jul 06.
Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated, 5 Sep 06.
Exhibit G. Letter, Applicant’s Daughter, undated.
MICHAEL J. NOVEL
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00509
DPPRS complete 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 17 Mar 06 for review and comment within 30 days and on 17 Apr 2006, he was forwarded a copy of the FBI report. Novel, Panel Chair Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member Mr. John E. B. Smith, Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Feb...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00279
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00279 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 1 AUG 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). ___________________________________________________________________ The following members...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01568
The Board found that the applicant did commit an act of homosexuality and recommended he be discharged from the Air Force with a general discharge. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 8 December 1955, he was discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). JOE G....
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03017
The discharge authority approved the separation and directed he be discharged with an undesirable discharge. 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. Furthermore, based on the available evidence of record and since the applicant has not provided information of his post-service activities and accomplishments, we cannot conclude that clemency is...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2006-01846
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006- 01846 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 15 DECEMBER 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. Novel, Panel Chair Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Member Ms. Jan Mulligan, Member The following documentary...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03547
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03547 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: May 20, 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general (under honorable conditions) discharge based on clemency and his service number be corrected. The applicant’s complete response is at...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02072
On 11 Oct 73, an evaluation officer interviewed the applicant and recommended he be discharged with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge for unsuitability based upon a defective attitude. ____________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied, and states, in part, based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00269
Although the applicant contends the accusations of homosexuality were never substantiated, he rendered a sworn statement to the OSI, admitting to homosexual relations with Air Force personnel. Furthermore, the regulation in effect at that time required that a member be issued an undesirable discharge. Exhibit C. FBI Report, dated 8 Jun 06.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01438
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 | CY2006 | BC-2006-01915
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 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...