RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00148
INDEX CODE:  110.02
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX				COUNSEL: NONE

XXX-XX-XXXX				HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

His undesirable discharge be upgraded to general.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

After serving stockade time, he was told he would be separated with a general discharge and his only alternative was a general court-martial and dishonorable discharge. Though he did not want to be separated, he felt he had no choice.  He makes no excuses for his misconduct other than he was young and immature.  He was unaware of the appeal process when he first discovered he had been separated with an undesirable discharge certificate.

The applicant provided no evidence in support of his appeal.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 12 September 1955, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the age of 17 in the grade of airman basic (E-1) for a period of four years.  The applicant was progressively promoted to the grade of airman third class (E-2) effective 8 December 1955.  The applicant received excellent ratings for character and efficiency on three occasions from 12 September 1955 through 2 May 1956.

On 23 July 1956, the applicant received an Article 15 punishment consisting of a reduction in grade to airman basic for a drunk and disorderly offense.  The applicant was convicted by court-martial on 19 December 1956 for leaving base without a liberty pass.  He received confinement at hard labor for 30 days and was ordered to forfeit $55 as his punishment.  He was again convicted by court-martial on 21 May 1957 for failure to report to his place of duty.  He was restricted to base for 30 days and was ordered to forfeit $25.  His last court-martial occurred on 31 May 1957, for breaking the 30-day base restriction.  He was fined an additional $60.  On 15 July 1957, the applicant received a second Article 15 for public drunkenness (he had been apprehended by civil law enforcement authorities).  He was ordered to perform 2 hours of extra duty per day for a period of 14 consecutive days.

The applicant received a commander directed psychiatric evaluation on 22 July 1957 and was found to have no mental or physical condition sufficient to warrant his separation.  On 23 July 1957, his commander notified the applicant that a Board of Officers had been appointed to determine whether he should be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-17 because of unfitness.  The applicant acknowledged receipt and requested counsel.  The applicant and his counsel appeared before the board on 24 September 1957.  After considering the testimony and reviewing the evidence, the board found the applicant gave evidence of habits, which rendered his retention undesirable and recommended he be discharged with an undesirable discharge.  The staff judge advocate reviewed the board proceedings and recommended approval.

On 18 October 1957, the discharge authority approved the recommended separation and directed that the applicant be discharged with an undesirable discharge.  The applicant was discharged effective 31 October 1957 under other than honorable conditions.  He had served 2 years and 24 days on active duty.  Time lost was 25 days due to confinement.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, WV, provided a copy of an Investigation Report pertaining to the applicant, which is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states the applicant’s discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation in affect at that time.  Additionally, the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluation and the FBI report were forwarded to the applicant on 14 February 2003 and 21 March 2003 for review and comment (Exhibits D and F).  As of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  The applicant did not provide persuasive evidence showing the information in the discharge case was erroneous, his substantial rights were violated, or that his commanders abused their discretionary authority.  The characterization of discharge which was issued at the time of the applicant’s separation accurately reflects the circumstances of his separation and we do not find the characterization of discharge to be in error or unjust.  In view of the foregoing and in the absence of evidence by the applicant attesting to a successful post-service adjustment in the years since his separation, we are not inclined to extend clemency in this case.  Therefore, we conclude that no basis exists upon which to recommend favorable action on his request that it be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

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 14 May 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003‑00148 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Jan 03, with attachment.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 31 Jan 03.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Feb 03.
	Exhibit E.  FBI Report #640447L7, dated 13 Mar 03.
	Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 21 Mar 03.