RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-02487
		INDEX CODE:  110.02
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general (under honorable conditions) discharge effective 24 June 1950 be upgraded to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The reason he received a general (under honorable conditions) discharge was that he was told he acted too young to be in the Air Force.  Nevertheless, after his discharge he continued to reenlist and retired with 26 ½ years of service.

In support of his request, he submits copies of his DD Form 214, discharge certificate, certificate of retirement with order.  

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 25 June 1947, the applicant enlisted in the United States Army for a period of 3 years.  He was subsequently transferred to the United States Air Force.  During this period of service, he was progressively promoted to the grade of corporal (E-3) and received the following character and efficiency ratings.  

	DATE	CHARACTER		EFFICIENCY

	27 Sep 1947	Excellent		Excellent
	28 May 1948	Excellent		Satisfactory
	14 Dec 1948	Excellent		Excellent
	12 May 1949	Excellent		Excellent
	11 Aug 1949	Excellent		Excellent
	20 Mar 1950	Very Good		Unsatisfactory

On 24 June 1950, the applicant was discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge because of expiration of term of service.  He had served 3 years on active duty with no time lost.  He was awarded the Good Conduct Medal.

The applicant reenlisted on 25 June 1950 and continued to enlist and serve until 30 December 1964, when he was discharged in the grade of staff sergeant.  He was credited with 17 years, 6 months and 3 days of active duty service.

On 19 May 1979, the applicant enlisted in the Air Force Reserve and the Air National Guard.  He was discharged from the Air National Guard in July 1980 but continued to serve as a member of the Air Force Reserve.  As of the Retirement Year Ending (RYE) 18 May 1987, he was credited with 25 years, 6 months and 6 days of satisfactory Federal service.  Effective 20 May 1987, having been relieved from his Reserve assignment, he was assigned to the Retired Reserve with eligibility for retired pay except for attainment of age 60.  On 15 June 1990, the applicant’s name was placed on the USAF Retired List in the grade of master sergeant.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied.  DPPRS states that the applicant provided no facts warranting an upgrade of his discharge.  Based upon the documentation on file, DPPRS believes the discharge was consistent with procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. 

The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant provided a personal statement indicating he did nothing wrong and was told by his officer he was too young and immature to be in the service.  However, during that enlistment he graduated from medial and surgical school demonstrating he was not immature.  He believes with all his years of service his discharge should be upgraded to honorable.

The applicant’s response 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 probable error or injustice.  Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we find no evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the documentation that has been submitted, the Board does not believe he has suffered from an injustice.  While it is true that the service characterization issued upon the completion of the period of service ending 24 June 1950 did not preclude the applicant’s continued service and, ultimately, his retirement, in our estimation, this fact, alone, does not warrant approval of the requested relief.  We note that the last efficiency rating he received in March 1950, after completing nearly 3 years of service, was unsatisfactory.  It is entirely probable that it was this factor which led to the characterization of his service as general, under honorable conditions.  However, neither does the record reveal nor has the applicant provided any specific evidence as to the reasons that his service was characterized as less than fully honorable.  In view of the above and in the absence of evidence by the applicant indicating his superiors abused their discretionary authority, we find no 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 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 27 February 2002 under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

Panel Chair
Member
Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 Aug 01, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 9 Nov 01 w/atchs.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 21 Nov 01.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 5 Dec 01.