RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-02613
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was not able to adjust to military life.  He went absent without leave (AWOL) because of this.  He requested that he be sent overseas and was sure that he would have been OK.  He was very immature.

In support of his application, the applicant provided a personal statement and a copy of his discharge document.  Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant’s master personnel record (MPR) appears to have been destroyed by the 1973 fire at the National Personnel records Center (NPRC) in St. Louis. Based on the available documentation, the following facts are provided.

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 5 April 1954 at the age of 17.

On 19 September 1955, while serving in the grade of airman basic, he was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-17 (Unfitness) and separated with an undesirable discharge.  He was credited with 7 months and 26 days of active duty.  Time lost was 288 days.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, indicated on the basis of the data furnished they were unable to locate an arrest record (Exhibit C).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS states that the applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors in the discharge processing.  However, considering the discharge occurred over 46 years ago and the lack of records, they recommend clemency.  If a check of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) files proves negative, they recommend the discharge be upgrade to under honorable conditions (general).

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states that he is totally ashamed of what occurred when he was in the USAF.  His trouble stemmed from his not being mature enough to handle things.  He was 17 years old at the time he enlisted.  He was home sick and was not able to adjust to military life.  He has regretted all the bad decisions that he made at that time.  His only crime was that he went AWOL.  He always turned himself in and knew he would have to face whatever punishment would be handed out.  If anything good came out of this it was that it made him a much better person in the long run.  He has been married for 40 years, has two daughters and four grandchildren; and was able to purchase a house.  He has worked in the same type of business for 40 years and has had the pleasure of meeting a lot of good people.  He has never been in trouble with the authorities.  His family knows what he did while he was in the Air Force and how sorry he is about what happened.  He loves his country and would never do anything to hurt it.  He has always been upstanding and truthful.  If he had to do it over he would be a good airman.  He had a twin brother who enlisted in the Marines 5 years after he went in.  He was named recruit of the month at Camp Lejune and was honorably discharged after his time was up.  That was 5 years after he enlisted.  He was mature enough and knew what the applicant did and how he regretted his mistakes.  The applicant is sure he had some impact on his brother.  Today, the applicant lives in a retirement village in ---- and has a house that is paid for.  He hangs his flag outside his home every day.  He is proud to be an American.  He asks that this discharge be granted so he can have some dignity.  He is so sorry that this incident had to happen.

Applicant's complete response, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit F.  In addition, applicant has provided additional character references.

_________________________________________________________________

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.	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 applicant was not afforded all the rights to which entitled at the time of discharge.  Considered alone, we conclude the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances.

4.	Consideration of this Board, however, is not limited to the events which precipitated the discharge.  We have a Congressional mandate which permits consideration of other factors; e.g., applicant's background, the overall quality of service, and post-service activities and accomplishments.  Further, we may base our decision on matters of inequity and clemency rather than simply on whether rules and regulations which existed at the time were followed.  This is a much broader consideration than officials involved in the discharge were permitted, and our decision in no way discredits or questions the validity of their decision.

5.	Under our broader mandate and after careful consideration of all the facts and circumstances of applicant's case, the majority of the Board is persuaded that applicant has overcome the behavioral traits which led to the contested discharge and has been a productive member of society.  The majority of the Board recognizes the adverse impact of the discharge applicant received; and, while it may have been appropriate at the time, the majority believes it would now be an injustice for the applicant to continue to suffer its effects.  Accordingly, the majority of the Board finds that corrective action is appropriate on the basis of clemency and is of the opinion that the applicant’s discharge should be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions).  The Board majority does not believe upgrading the applicant’s discharge to fully honorable, as he has requested, is appropriate based on the short period of time the applicant served and because of the inordinate amount of time lost to the government.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 19 September 1955, he was discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions).

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 8 October 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

			Panel Chair
		Member
			Member

By a majority vote, the Board voted to correct the records, as recommended.  Mr. voted to deny applicant's request, but does not desire to submit a Minority Report for review.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 7 Sep 01, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	FBI Report.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 29 Oct 01.
	Exhibit E.	Letter, AFBCMR, dated 16 Nov 01.
	Exhibit F.	Applicant’s Response, dated 21 Jan 02, w/atchs.

                                                      

AFBCMR 01-02613
INDEX CODE:  110.00

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

	Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

	The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to, be corrected to show that on 19 September 1955, he was discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions).