RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01187 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His undesirable discharge be upgraded. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He was told that his discharge would be changed to a more 
honorable characterization after leaving military service. He 
believes he completed the process to upgrade his discharge in the 
late 1950’s. He does not recall the outcome of the upgrade. His 
wife believes he received a favorable upgrade, but does not 
recall the specific outcome of his request. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of 
documents extracted from his military personnel records. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 27 Jun 52, the applicant contracted his enlistment in the 
Regular Air Force. He was progressively promoted to the rank of 
airman first class; however, he was demoted to airman basic on 
28 Oct 53. 

 

On 19 Apr 54, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was 
recommending his discharge from the Air Force for unfitness. The 
specific reasons for the discharge action were the applicant’s 
continual commission of minor disciplinary infractions. The 
applicant was counseled on five different occasions regarding his 
actions in the barracks, his conduct on and off duty, and his 
admitted attempts to obtain an unfitness discharge. The 
commander also noted two instances of checks on insufficient 
funds, one instance of leaving mail in a vehicle overnight, and 
one instance of leaving mail unguarded. 

 


His commander advised him of his rights in this matter. On 
11 May 54, the applicant acknowledged he was offered legal 
counsel and voluntarily signed the discharge application. 

 

On 28 May 54, the discharge authority directed the applicant’s 
undesirable discharge. He was discharged on 2 Jul 54 and was 
credited with 1 year, 11 months, and 5 days active service. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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. 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 process. Based on the available 
evidence of record, it appears the applicant’s undesirable 
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 his service was 
contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation, unduly 
harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses committed. We 
considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, in 
the absence of any evidence related to the applicant’s activities 
since leaving the service, we find no basis to recommend granting 
the relief sought on that basis. However, should the applicant 
decide to submit information related to his post-service 
activities (i.e. supporting statements from community leaders and 
acquaintances, or other evidence of a successful post-service 
rehabilitation) we may be inclined to reconsider his request based 
on new evidence. 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 the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2011-01187 in Executive Session on 10 Jan 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 Apr 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Military Personnel Records. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair