RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01189 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: There was no reason he should have received a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of extracts from his master personnel records, a discharge review fact sheet, his Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) rating decision, correspondence to and from the DVA, the United States Army, the North Carolina American Legion, and a DD Form 293, Application for Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Available records reflect the applicant entered the Regular Air Force on 30 November 1951. In March 1952, the applicant requested discharge for the convenience of the government based on physical defects which were disqualifying for retention and existed prior to service. However, on 31 March 1952, his request was denied and on 25 April 1952, he was found fit for return to full duty. On 4 June 1954, the applicant was notified of pending discharge action. Specifically, the commander cited unfitness as the basis for discharge. The applicant was given a complete physical and mental examination and no physical or mental defects were diagnosed. He waived his entitlement to a board hearing. On 15 July 54, the applicant was discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI), Clarksburg, West Virginia, states they were unable to identify an arrest record on the basis of the information furnished. _________________________________________________________________ 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 an error or an injustice. We find no impropriety in the characterization of applicant's discharge. It appears that responsible officials applied appropriate standards in effecting the separation, and we do not find persuasive evidence that pertinent regulations were violated or that the applicant was not afforded all the rights to which entitled at the time of discharge. Therefore, we conclude that the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances. In view of the above, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. _________________________________________________________________ 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 Docket Number BC-2010-01189 in Executive Session on 30 March 2011, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered for Docket Number BC-2010-01189: Exhibit A. DD Forms 149, dated 19 Mar and 7 Jul 10, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.