RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04029
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded
to honorable.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He believes the circumstances under which he was discharged from
the Air Force were no fault of his own. He developed double
pneumonia due to conditions at Lackland Air Force Base during
basic training. He was very weak and unable to complete basic
training; therefore, he was discharged from the service.
In support of the applicants appeal, he provides a personal
statement.
The applicants complete submission, with attachment, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 8 January
1951.
The applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to
recommend that he be discharged from the Air Force under the
provisions of AR 615-369.
The applicant was examined on 16 March 1951 by the chief of
neuropsychiatric section and was diagnosed with schizoid
personality, chronic, severe, manifested by seclusiveness,
inability to form relationships with people, nervousness shown
as nail biting and tremor, aggression shown in headaches.
The applicant was advised of his rights in the matter and his
case was heard before a board of officers. The board
recommended discharge due to unsuitability. The board found the
applicant was unsuitable for further military service because of
disruptive reactions to acute or special stress, and lack of
physical stamina.
The discharge authority concurred with the recommendation and
directed a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The
applicant was discharged on 18 May 1951. He served 4 months and
11 days on active duty.
Pursuant to the Boards request, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation indicated that on the basis of the information
provided, they were able to locate an arrest record.
On 15 July 2014, a request for information pertaining to his
post-service activities was forwarded to the applicant for
review and response within 30 days (Exhibit C). As of this
date, no response has been received by this office.
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by
existing law or regulations.
2. The application was not timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice sufficient to
compel waiving the statute of limitations. We took notice of
the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the
case; however, the Board majority finds no evidence that an
error or injustice 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. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the
discharge based on clemency; however, based on the evidence
before us, the majority of the Board finds no basis to grant
clemency at this time. Therefore, having reviewed the facts of
the case and the applicant's contentions, the majority concludes
the interests of justice do not compel the Board to waive the
statute of limitations.
RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD:
A majority of the Board finds insufficient evidence of error or
injustice and recommends the application be denied as untimely.
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2013-04029 in Executive Session on 26 August 2014,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Although Ms. Barger chaired the panel, in view of her
unavailability, Mr. Tompkins has agreed to sign as Acting Panel
Chair. By a majority vote, the Board recommended denial of the
application. Mr. Brown voted to grant the applicants request
and provided a minority report. The following documentary
evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 August 2013, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Available Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 15 July 2014.
Exhibit D. Minority Report, dated 27 August 2014.
2
3
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02230
In the interest of justice, the Board considered upgrading the characterization of the applicants discharge based on clemency; however, after considering his overall record of service and his post-service documentation, the Board majority did not find the evidence presented was sufficient to compel them to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 14 Feb 2014, w/atch. Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 4 Mar 2014, w/atchs.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02356
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, and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. _________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: A majority of the Board finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be denied. LAURENCE M. GRONER Panel...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02356
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, and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. _________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: A majority of the Board finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be denied. LAURENCE M. GRONER Panel...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02407
In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his DD Form 214, Report of Separation from Active Duty; DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States and a personal statement dated 10 Mar 1975. 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. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02536
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02536 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His character of service be changed from general, (under honorable conditions), to honorable. Subsequent to the file being found legally sufficient, the discharge authority approved the recommendation and directed the applicant be discharged with a...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00654
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00654 COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His record of service in the Air Force was honorable. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03787
The DPPPR evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 19 May 2006, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit D). The Board majority notes evidence has not been provided and there is no documentation in the applicant’s military personnel record, which would substantiate that the recommendation for award of...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02255
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02255 COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was exonerated by a judge from Washington. In the interest...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03565
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03565 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. He should have received proper medication and counseling when he was diagnosed while on active duty. The commander also indicated he was recommending the applicant receive...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-04029
The recoupment action of his $11,581.56, Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) be waived. AFI 36-3205, Applying for the Palace Chase and Palace Front Programs, clearly states the member must repay any unearned portion of an enlistment or reenlistment bonus. The master military pay account (MMPA) shows he separated with a SPD code of KGQ which indicates the bonus is to be recouped unless he separated under Force Shaping.