RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01297
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. His reason and authority of SDN 363 be removed from his
DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of
Transfer or Discharge.
2. His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be
upgraded to honorable.
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His discharge should be upgraded due to a back injury that he
incurred from an auto accident in November or December 1960 at
Kelly Air Force Base, Texas. He notes that his doctor placed
false information in his medical report in order to get him out
of the service. He believes the doctor was afraid that he would
report him for sexual advancements.
In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his
Department of Veterans Administration paperwork, a copy of his
psychological evaluation, excerpts from his medical records, and
a copy of a letter from the Office of Personnel Management.
His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
_
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted into the Regular Air Force on 13 Sep 60.
The applicants commander notified him that he was recommending
him for discharge for emotional instability under the provisions
of AFR 39-16, paragraph 4b. He acknowledged receipt of the
discharge notification and had the opportunity to submit
statements in his own behalf. He received a general (UHC)
discharge on 11 Jun 62 after serving 1 year, 8 months, and
29 days on active duty.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are
contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of
the Air Force, which is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
_
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
1. AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial of changing the applicants
reason and authority. After the applicant was evaluated by an
evaluation officer, it was determined that the applicant was
unsuited for further military service. The specific results of
his evaluation found the following: 1) He was completely
incompatible with normal military existence; 2) He could not get
along with any of his co-workers, could not take competent
orders and he just wanted out; 3) His desire was to be
separated from the service before any other action on his part
resulted in a bad conduct discharge or worse; 4) He failed to
obey lawful orders from superiors; 5) His had a lack of interest
to participate and progress in upgrade and on-the-job programs.
The applicants emotional instability reactions were determined
by the medical profession to be unreliable and possibly
dangerous.
2. The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any
errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.
The discharge to include his reason and authority was consistent
with the procedural and substantive requirements and the
discharge manual and was within the discharge authoritys
discretion.
The complete DPSOR 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 10 May 13 for review and comment within 30 days.
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. In this
respect, 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. As such, we agree with the
opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary
responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our
conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an
error or injustice. In addition, in the interest of justice, we
considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however,
we do not find the evidence presented sufficient 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.
________________________________________________________________
_
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-2013-02197 in Executive Session on 5 Nov 13, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 Feb 13, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 6 May 13.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 May 13.
Panel Chair
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
4
3
This document contains information which must be protected IAW AFI 33-332 and DoD Regulation
5400.11; Privacy Act of 1974 as Amended Applies, and it is For Official Use Only (FOUO).
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05274
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility which are included at Exhibits C and F. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. Had the Air Force known of this condition at the time of his enlistment, the applicant would not have been allowed entry into...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01900
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 discharge authoritys discretion. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05542
His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued in conjunction with his 8 Aug 83 separation, Item 19, Mailing Address after Separation, be changed to San Antonio, TX. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial of the applicants request to change his mailing address after separation. The applicant failed to provide supporting documentation that the Florida address was in error.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03044
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force, which is at Exhibit C and D. ________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial stating they found no error or injustice in the processing of the discharge action. The applicant has not provided any facts or evidence to indicate he was not medically cleared for discharge or that he...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01694
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01694 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Separation from Active Duty, be corrected to reflect award of the Presidential Unit Citation with Bronze Oak Leaf Cluster (PUC w/BOLC) and any other awards that he may be entitled to. The...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01686
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01686 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. In this respect, the evidence of record indicates the applicant was given an entry level separation and a SPD code of JFC for his erroneous entry into the Air Force. ________________________________________________________________ _ THE BOARD...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01413
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01413 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) code of 2C (Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or, entry-level separation without characterization of service) and narrative reason for separation (Erroneous Entry), be changed to allow him to reenter...
The medical doctor recommended that he be considered for appearance before a Board of Officers (BO) with a view toward his separation from the Air Force. In addition, he was requested to provide information pertaining to his activities since leaving the service (see Exhibit F). Based on a review of the limited post- service evidence provided and in view of the contents of the FBI Identification Record, we are not persuaded that an upgrade of applicant’s discharge is warranted on the basis...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01439
His narrative reason for separation is Request for Discharge in Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial. He had 13 years, 6 months and 8 days of active service. The complete Medical Consultants evaluation is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The advisory opinions rely heavily on the fact of the absence of military and medical records in this case to recommend denial of the applicants requested...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02448
His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be changed to reflect his rank as SGT (sergeant), instead of SRA (senior airman). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial of the applicants request to change his...