Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-02516
Original file (BC-2008-02516.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-02516
            INDEX CODE:  110.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  undesirable  discharge  be  upgraded  to  a  general  (under  honorable
conditions) or an honorable discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He never received legal counsel during his  discharge  processing.   He  was
never informed that he did not have to  sign  documentation  to  accept  his
discharge.  He thought if he did not sign the paperwork he would  be  court-
martialed.  He did not understand at the time what he was doing, because  he
only had a fifth grade education.

In support of his request, the applicant provided a  copy  of  his  DD  form
214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

It appears the applicant's military  personnel  records  were  destroyed  by
fire in 1973 at the National Personnel Record Center  (NPRC)  in  St. Louis,
Missouri.

The  document  extracted  from  the  reconstructed  record   indicates   the
applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 13 August 1952 for  a  period
of  four  years.   He  served  as  an  Apprentice  Munitions   and   Weapons
Maintenance Specialist.

On 17 July 1956, the applicant was discharged in the grade of  airman  basic
with  an  undesirable  discharge,  under  the  provisions   of   AFR   39-17
(Unfitness).  He served 3 years, 8 months and 26 days on active duty.

Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation  (FBI),
Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an arrest record which is at Exhibit C.

On 26 August 2008, a copy of the FBI Report of Investigation and  a  request
for information pertaining to his post-service activities was  forwarded  to
the applicant for review and  response  within  30 days  (Exhibit  D).   The
applicant provided additional information which is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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  find  no
evidence  of  an  error  or  injustice  that  occurred  in   the   discharge
processing.  Based on the available  evidence  of  record,  it  appears  the
discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the  discharge
regulation  and  within  the  commander's  discretionary   authority.    The
applicant has provided no evidence  which  would  lead  us  to  believe  the
characterization of the service  was  contrary  to  the  provisions  of  the
governing regulation, unduly harsh,  or  disproportionate  to  the  offenses
committed.   We  considered  upgrading  the  discharge  based  on  clemency;
however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient  to  compel  us
to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis.   Therefore,  in  the
absence of evidence to  the  contrary,  we  find  no  basis  upon  which  to
recommend granting the relief sought.

4.    The applicant's case is adequately documented  and  it  has  not  been
shown that a personal appearance with or  without  counsel  will  materially
add to our understanding of the issues  involved.   Therefore,  the  request
for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or an injustice; the application was denied without  a
personal appearance; and 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2008-
02516 in Executive Session on 9 October 2008, under the provisions of  AFI
36-2603:

                 Mr. James W. Russell III, Panel Chair
                 Mrs. Lea Gallogly, Member
                 Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

  Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 2 June 2008, w/atchs.
  Exhibit B. Applicant's Available Master Personnel Records.
  Exhibit C. FBI Report of Investigation.
  Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 26 August 2008.
  Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, not dated, w/atchs.





                       JAMES W. RUSSELL III
                       Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02516

    Original file (BC-2006-02516.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant’s master personnel record (MPR) appears to have been lost or destroyed. 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 and adopt their rationale as the basis for the conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03533

    Original file (BC-2007-03533.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    74 dated 15 Jul 49 and the applicant was discharged from the Air Force on 15 Jul 49 with an undesirable discharge. 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 (Exhibit C). To date, no response has been received (Exhibit D).

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00206

    Original file (BC-2008-00206.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-00206 INDEX CODE: 106.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to at least a general discharge. On or about 1 October 1952, he failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty. On 12 February 1957, the Air Force Discharge...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00913

    Original file (BC-2008-00913.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-00913 INDEX CODE: 110.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded. On 22 September 1967, the Numbered Air Force (15AF) Judge Advocate (JA) reviewed the request and found it legally sufficient to support a discharge for the good of the service. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00537

    Original file (BC-2007-00537.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant entered active duty in the Air Force on 18 Jan 82. DPPRS states that based on the documentation on file in the applicant’s master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03697

    Original file (BC-2007-03697.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provided a copy of an Investigative Report, which is at Exhibit C. On 18 Jan 08, a copy of the FBI report was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days, as of this date, no response has been received by this office. We considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to compel us to recommend granting the relief sought on that...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00503

    Original file (BC-2008-00503.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 26 January 1990, the applicant’s commander notified him he was recommending him for an under honorable conditions (general) discharge for fraudulent entry. The applicant admitted he falsified portions of two DD Form 398s, DD Forms 1966/3 and 1966/5, Record of Military Processing–United States Armed Forces, and a DD Form 4/2, Enlistment/Reenlistment Document–Armed Forces of the United States. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00991

    Original file (BC-2007-00991.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 17 November 1952, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend him for discharge from the Air Force under the provisions of Air Force Regulation (AFR) 39-22 for a conviction by a civil court. The applicant has not shown the characterization of his discharge was contrary to the provisions of AFR 39-22, Enlisted Personnel, Disposition of Individuals Convicted by Civil Court (Exhibit D). The applicant in response to the FBI report submitted a letter clarifying the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-03234

    Original file (BC-2008-03234.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 22 Jun 84, the board agreed with the findings and recommendations of the applicant’s commander. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we find no evidence of an error or injustice that occurred in the discharge processing. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, not dated.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02192

    Original file (BC-2007-02192.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02192 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: Jan 14, 2009 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to under honorable conditions (general discharge). On 24 Jul 73, the applicant requested a board hearing. Exhibit C. FBI...