RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBER:  02-01856
							INDEX CODE:  110.02
					          COUNSEL:  NONE
                                   HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His bad conduct discharge be upgraded to honorable.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He feels that the initial cause of his problems in the service stemmed from the mistreatment he received from his training officer.  He had numerous physical problems that interfered with the physical requirements required of basic training.  His training officer used him as an example and created for him an extremely hostile environment that led him to commit numerous Absences Without Leave (AWOLs).  Since his experience in the service he has led an exemplary life.  He has been happily married for 32 years and has been a contributor to his church and community.  He has owned his own business and has been extremely successful.  

His actions of today show that he has become a contributing member of his church and community.  He feels that the problems he experienced in the Air Force were not of his own doing and are not indicative of who he really is.  He did not realize that he only had 15 years to try to upgrade his discharge.  He has been diagnosed with lung cancer and would like to correct the one truly bad thing that has occurred in his life, the discharge he received from the Air Force.  He feels he has lived a good and giving life and would like any question of his military service be put to rest.  He requests that the Air Force look at what he has become, a pillar of his community, and grant him his request to have his discharge upgraded to honorable.

In support of his request, he submits a personal statement, character references, a copy of his DD Form 214 and a copy of his discharge physical. 

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 29 February 1952, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force in the grade of private (E-1) at the age of 17 with parental consent for a period of 4 years.  

From 25 July 1952 to 13 August 1952, he was charged with Absent Without Leave (AWOL).  For this incident, tried and convicted by a summary court-martial.  He was sentenced to perform hard labor for forty-five (45) days and to forfeit fifty-five dollars ($55) of his pay.  

From 6 September 1952 to 10 September 1952, he was charged with AWOL.  For this incident, he was tried and convicted by a summary court-martial.  He was ordered to perform hard labor for 15 days and to forfeit twenty dollars ($20) of his pay.

From 20 September 1952 to 9 October 1952, he was charged with AWOL.  For this incident, he was tried and convicted by a summary court-martial.  He was sentenced to be confined at hard labor for thirty (30) days and to forfeit fifty dollars ($50) of his pay. 

On 25 April 1968, the applicant was tried by a special court-martial for violation of Article 86, Absent Without Leave (AWOL), from 29 December 1952 until 20 January 1953 and 23 January 1953 until 31 January 1953.  He pled not guilty, was found guilty and was sentenced to be discharged with a bad conduct discharge, to be confined for three months, and to forfeit fifty-five ($55) dollars for three months.

The applicant was discharged with a bad conduct discharge on 1 June 1953.  He had served 7 months and 22 days on active duty.  He had 225 days lost time due to AWOL and confinement.

On 28 May 1954, the Air Force Discharge Review Board reviewed and denied applicant’s request that his discharge be upgraded.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the FBI provided a copy of an Investigative Report, No. 601666B, which is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied.  DPPRS states that based upon the documentation in the file, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  DPPRS further states that the applicant has not provided any new evidence or identified any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.

The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 15 July 2002, a letter was forwarded to applicant suggesting that the applicant consider providing evidence pertaining to his post-service activities.  On 6 August 2002, the Division of Veterans’ Affairs, State of New York, requested clemency be given to the applicant who has suffered long enough for a mistake he made as a young man.  This letter, with attachments, is at Exhibit F.

On 18 July 2002, a copy of the FBI report was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment.  Applicant’s spouse responded by stating that they were aware of the charges and that he has been forgiven.  Her husband is a great man and was a troubled youngster who most likely got involved with the wrong crowd (Exhibit G).

_________________________________________________________________

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.  It appears that under the given circumstances at that time, responsible officials applied appropriate standards in effecting his discharge action.  Applicant’s contentions and supporting statements were duly noted. However, based on the short period of time he served on active duty, the excessive amount of time lost to the government and the limited evidence provided, in our estimation, the evidence submitted is not of a sufficient quality and quantity to warrant the approval of the requested relief.  In addition, an FBI record provided information pertaining to the applicant indicating involvement with law enforcement authorities for approximately 35 years after his separation, the most recent occurring approximately 13 years ago.  In view of this fact and in the absence of more expansive evidence by the applicant attesting to a successful post-service adjustment in the years after his last involvement with civil law enforcement authorities, we are not inclined to extend clemency in this case. 

_________________________________________________________________

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 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 16 October 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 June 2002 w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 19 June 2002.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 June 2002.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, FBI Report, dated 31 July 2002.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 15 July 2002.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, Applicant’s Spouse, dated 11 August 2002.

                                   
                                   Panel Chair