Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00847
Original file (BC-2007-00847.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-00847
      INDEX CODE:  110.00
      COUNSEL:  NONE

      HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE:  22 SEPTEMBER 2008

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her  late  husband’s  general  (under  honorable  conditions)  discharge  be
upgraded to honorable.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her late husband had a successful post-service  life.   He  acquired  a  law
degree, he worked for  a  publishing  company  for  17  years,  and  he  was
appointed as an administrative law judge.  He later came out  of  retirement
to work in a local high school with at-risk children.

In support of her application, the applicant submits  a  copy  of  her  late
husband’s  general  discharge  certificate,  a  copy  of   his   educational
allowance letter, a copy of his board of bar examiners  letter,  a  copy  of
his appointment notice,  a  newspaper  article  and  a  copy  of  his  death
certificate.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The service-member enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the age of 17  (with
his parent’s consent) in the grade of airman basic for a period of 4  years.


On 31 Mar 58, the  service-member’s  commander  notified  him  that  he  was
initiating discharge action against him under AFR 39-17 due to his  repeated
offenses.

The service-member received Article 15 action  for  the  following  offenses
and on the dates indicated:

      (1)  Wearing civilian clothing while in BMT on 16 Dec 56.
      (2)  Failure to obey an order to report to TAC  instructor  on  17 Dec
56.

      (3)  Failure to obey  supervising  NCO’s  lawful  order  to  wit:  get
chevrons on all uniforms and never report to Orderly Room again without  any
on 27 Nov 57.

      (4)  Reported for pay without chevrons on Class “A” uniform on 30  Nov
57.

He received three  court-martial  convictions  for  possession  of  a  false
military pass and two incidents of being absent without leave (AWOL).

The service-member was advised of his rights  and  provided  legal  counsel.
He waived his right to a hearing before a board of  officers  and  requested
he be discharged without the benefit of board  proceedings.   The  commander
thereafter initiated a recommendation for the applicant’s separation.

In a legal review of the discharge case file the staff judge advocate  found
the file was legally sufficient.  On  11  Jun  58,  the  service-member  was
discharged  because  of  unfitness  and  issued  an  undesirable   discharge
certificate.  He had served     1 year, 5  months  and  11  days  on  active
duty.

In a similar appeal, the service-member requested his undesirable  discharge
be upgraded to honorable by the Air Force Discharge  Review  Board  (AFDRB).
On 15 Jan 73, the AFDRB  voted  to  upgrade  the  applicant’s  discharge  to
general and a new DD 214 was issued.

In response to the Board’s request, the FBI indicated they  were  unable  to
identify with an arrest record pertaining to the applicant on the  basis  of
information furnished.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ  AFPC/DPPRS  recommends  denial.   DPPRS  states  that   based   on   the
documentation on file in the service-member’s 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.  Additionally, the applicant  did  not  submit  any
evidence  or  identify  any  errors  or  injustices  that  occurred  in  the
discharge processing, and she provided no facts  warranting  an  upgrade  of
the service-member’s discharge.

The complete DPPRS 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  6  Apr
07 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office  has
received no response (Exhibit D).

________________________________________________________________

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  office  of  primary
responsibility and adopt its 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 probable 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 5 June 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
      Ms. Marcia Jane Bachman, Member
      Ms. Mary C. Puckett, Member



The following documentary evidence was considered for AFBCMR  Docket  Number
BC-2007-00847:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 12 Mar 07 w/atch.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 28 Mar 07.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Apr 07.




                                  THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                  Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00275

    Original file (BC-2007-00275.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00275 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 4 JULY 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. The board of officers recommended applicant be discharged with an undesirable discharge. On 22 Nov 57, applicant submitted an...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200199

    Original file (0200199.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He recommended that applicant be discharged from the service. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant indicated that he is now retired and a member of the American Legion. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Mar 02, w/atchs.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01649

    Original file (BC 2014 01649.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 25 Nov 58, the applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to have his discharge upgraded; however, the AFDRB denied his application. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient for us to conclude that the applicant’s post-service activities overcome the misconduct for which he was discharged. Exhibit B.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02114

    Original file (BC-2005-02114.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A complete copy of the 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 5 Aug 05 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 28 Jul 05. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Aug 05.

  • 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 | CY2007 | BC-2007-01862

    Original file (BC-2007-01862.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The decision by the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to deny his request to upgrade his discharge to honorable was unjust. A legal review of the discharge case file by the staff judge advocate found the file legally sufficient and recommended the applicant be discharged with a general discharge without the opportunity for probation and rehabilitation. We took notice of the applicant's complete...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03657

    Original file (BC-2006-03657.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 25 Oct 61, he was honorably discharged from the Air Force Reserve in the grade of airman third class. Therefore, based on the evidence of record, we find no error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the documentation that has been submitted in support of applicant's appeal, we do not believe the former service member has been the victim of an error or injustice. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Jan 07.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00392

    Original file (BC-2007-00392.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 14 January 2003, the applicant received an LOC for failure to obey an order or regulation. DPPAE states there is no evidence in the applicant’s record to support that the RE code she received is incorrect or that it created an injustice. Exhibit F. Letter of Recommendation, dated 3 May 07.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9900471

    Original file (9900471.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 21 Feb 57, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force in the grade of airman basic under the provisions of AFR 39-17 (Unfitness) with an undesirable discharge. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Military Personnel Management Specialist, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed this application and indicated that the applicant did not identify any specific errors in the discharge proceedings nor provide facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge he received. Exhibit B.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02059

    Original file (BC-2002-02059.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The former member's request for upgrade of his discharge from under other than honorable to honorable was considered by the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) on 26 Jul 82. DPPRS indicated that, at the time the Air Force Review Board upgraded the former member's discharge to general, they stated that "further upgrade of the discharge was not appropriate because his records reflect extensive, though minor, acts of misconduct. We note that the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB)...