RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00731
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of
Transfer or Discharge, be corrected to reflect his honorable
discharge. In addition, his length of service be corrected to
reflect his separation date as 20 February 1964.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Even though his discharge reads December of 1963, he was not able
to leave his base of discharge until 20 February 1964.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of his DD
Form 214.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who
served on active duty from 9 July 1963 to 2 December 1963. A
letter from the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC), dated
18 September 2006, indicates the applicants records may have
been destroyed in the fire at NPRC on 12 July 1973.
Based on the limited available records, the applicant was
discharged effective 2 December 1963 with a general (under
honorable conditions) characterization of service in the grade of
airman basic (E-1). He served 4 months and 24 days on active
duty.
An Air Force Personnel Center letter, dated 31 August 1977,
indicates the Air Force Discharge Review Board upgraded the
applicants discharge to honorable on 6 February 1970, under
provisions of Air Force Regulation 39-16, Unsuitability. The
applicants record contains a DD Form 256 AF, Honorable Discharge
Certificate, with an effective date of 2 December 1963.
Pursuant to the Boards request, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI), Clarksburg, WV, provided a copy of an
Investigation Report (Exhibit C). On 16 June 2010, a copy of the
FBI report was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment
within 30 days. In addition, he was given the opportunity to
submit comments about his post service activities (Exhibit D).
As of this date, this office has received no 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 error or injustice. According to a
National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) letter, dated
18 September 2006, the applicants military service records may
have been destroyed in the 12 July 1973 fire. The applicants
original DD Form 214 indicates a general (under honorable
conditions) characterization of service; however, it was damaged
to the extent of not being legible. Nevertheless, available
legible documents verify his characterization of discharge was
upgraded to honorable by the Air Force Discharge Review Board
(AFDRB) on 6 February 1970. According to the Air Force Personnel
Center (AFPC), they issued an Honorable Discharge Certificate
(contained in the record) and a DD Form 214 to reflect the
AFDRBs decision; however, a copy of the revised DD Form 214 is
not contained in the record. Since the revised DD Form 214 was
completed after the NPRC fire, AFPC was contacted to see if a
copy was available in the historical files; however, the
historical files only date back to 1989. Therefore, with the
unfortunate facts that his DD Form 214 with an honorable
characterization of service is not available, and his DD Form 214
with a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of
service is not legible, it is impossible to recreate a new DD
Form 214 without access to the required information. In
reference to the applicants request to extend his length of
service to 20 February 1964, the applicant has provided no
evidence to support this request. In view of the above and in
the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no
basis exists to recommend granting the relief of sought in 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 AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2010-00731 in Executive Session on 21 October 2010,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection
with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-00731:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Feb 10, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. FBI Report 957636N11, dated 1 Jun 10.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 16 Jun 10, w/atchs.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00028
On 30 January 1964, he appeared before a board of officers and the findings and recommendation was to separate him with an under other than honorable conditions (undesirable) discharge. The base legal services reviewed the report from the board of officers and found it legally sufficient to support the findings and recommendation to discharge him with an under other than honorable conditions (undesirable) discharge. On 8 April 1964, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03302
He served one year, nine months, and seven days on active duty. On 4 April 1978, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) reviewed and upgraded the applicants characterization of discharge to general (under honorable conditions). The applicant has provided insufficient evidence to use as a basis to further upgrade his characterization of service based on the merits of the case or on clemency.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03572
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03572 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 25 MAY 2008 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (undesirable) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 4 December 1964, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending him for...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02395
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02395 (DECEASED) COUNSEL: NONE (BROTHER) HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The deceased former members discharge be upgraded from Undesirable to honorable. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge on the basis of clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03144
The PH is awarded for wounds received as a direct result of enemy actions (i.e., gunshot or shrapnel wounds, hand-to-hand combat wounds, forced aircraft bail out injuries, etc.). Each request is considered based on the policies and criteria in use at the time the veteran was injured, and the determination is dependent on the documentary evidence presented. The acts of heroism and personal sacrifice the applicant endured for our nation is noted; however, based on our review of the evidence...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01967
Other than the applicant’s attached brief and a copy of his Certificate of Military Service obtained from NPRC, the facts leading to the discharge are not available in his records. On 7 December 1979 the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his undesirable discharge to an honorable discharge. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02344
On 12 November 1964, an appointed Evaluation Officer (EO) recommended the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Air Force Regulation 39-16 with a general discharge. On 12 November 1964, the applicant was discharged from active duty with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. Furthermore, we do not find clemency is appropriate in this case since the applicant has not provided any evidence concerning his post-service activities.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00040
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Most of the applicant’s records were destroyed in the Jul 73 fire at the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC). Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report, which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS provided their rationale for...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00873
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00873 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 17 February 1971, applicant submitted an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his discharge be upgraded to honorable....
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02971
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02971 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be changed. On 9 Mar 12, a request for information pertaining to his post- service activities was forwarded to the applicant for response within 30 days. In response to our request, applicant provided post-service...