RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-01258
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His discharge be upgraded to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The things he did in 1958-1959 would be considered foolish or dumb acts and he would be offered an honorable discharge because he was too immature to handle the discipline required of the Air Force.  He states nothing he did was criminal.  He further states that he was coerced into signing his discharge by his OIC, NCOIC and First Sergeant.

Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 18 September 1957, in the grade of airman basic.

In August 1958, he received an Article 15 with reduction to airman basic for failure to repair; on 6 October 1958, he was punished under Article 15 with restriction to base for failure to repair.  On 17 October 1958, he was punished by Article 15 and given 2 extra duty hours for 14 days for failure to repair.  The applicant waived his entitlement to appear before a board and requested discharge.  On 9 April 1959, the applicant’s commander recommended discharge because applicant had demonstrated traits of character determined detrimental to the Air Force and stated his performance caused him to be a liability to his section.  The discharge was approved on 13 April 1959 and he was furnished an undesirable discharge.

The applicant, while serving in the grade of airman basic, was discharged from the Air Force on 24 April 1959 under the provisions of AFR 39-17 (Unfitness) and received an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He served 1 year 7 months and 7 days total active service.

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 they believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  Additionally, the discharge was within the sound discretion of the discharge authority.  Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant’s request.

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states that he has spent the last 43+ years as a good husband and father.  His priorities in life are family, God and country.  He knows he had a problem with alcohol while in the service and maybe a half dozen times after leaving, but it never interfered with his family life or their way of living.  He again states that he has been a good law abiding citizen for 43 years.  He is proud of the type of citizen he has become since leaving the Air Force, but ashamed about the reasons he left.  He could apologize to everyone he has ever hurt a hundred times, but he could never make up for his actions in the service.  As a civilian he would be proud to match up to anyone for character, morality, honesty and unbending love and devotion to his family.  

He is asking for clemency because he thinks that 43 years should be more than enough punishment for his errors of youth.

Applicant also provided statements, from his wife, daughter, and three character references.

A complete copy of applicant’s response, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  After reviewing the evidence of record, we are not persuaded that the applicant’s records are in error or that he has been the victim of an injustice.  Therefore, we agree with opinions and recommendations of the Air Force and adopt their rationale as the basis for the conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  We also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency.  We have considered applicant’s overall quality of service, the events which precipitated the discharge, and available evidence related to post-service activities and accomplishments.  On balance, we do not believe that clemency is warranted.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling 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 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 this application in Executive Session on 10 September 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 9 Apr 02, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	FBI Report.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 1 May 02.
	Exhibit E.	Letter, AFBCMR, dated 10 May 02.
	Exhibit F.	Applicant’s Letter, dated 4 Aug 02, w/atchs.