RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01009
		INDEX CODE:  110.02

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

It appears the applicant is requesting an upgrade of his undesirable discharge.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He received a letter from Washington DC while he was living in Seattle WA to go before the Board to have his hearing but he did not have the money to get to DC.

He gave seven years to the service and needs some medical help.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Prior to the period of service under review, the applicant served honorably in the Army Air Corps from 5 Jun 45 until 29 Jun 46; the Regular Army from 30 Jun 46 until 29 Jun 49; and the Air Force from 5 Jul 49 through 11 Aug 50.  

On 12 Aug 50, he reenlisted in the Air Force in the grade of staff sergeant for an unspecified period.  

On or about 1 Apr 52, applicant was arrested by civilian authorities and charged with forgery and held until his release to military authorities on 14 Aug 52.  He was convicted of forging and uttering a government check and placed in military confinement from 15 Aug 52 through 7 Sep 52. 

On 8 Sep 52, he was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-22, by reason of conviction by civil court, with service characterized as under other than honorable conditions and was issued an undesirable discharge certificate.  He was credited with 7 years, 2 months, and 29 days active service (includes 160 days of lost time due to confinement) (total of all periods of service).  

On 26 Feb 53, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge to honorable.  

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, WV, indicated on 17 Jul 03, that, on the basis of data furnished, they were unable to locate an arrest record (Exhibit C).

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS found that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  Additionally, that the discharge was within the sound discretion of the discharge authority.  They also noted that the applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing, nor did he provide any facts warranting an upgrade of his discharge.  Accordingly, they recommended his records remain the same.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit D.  

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 2 May 03 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E).

On 24 Jul 03, the applicant was invited to provide additional evidence pertaining to his activities since leaving the service.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (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 error or injustice.  The discharge appears to be in compliance with the governing regulations and we find no evidence to indicate that his separation from the Air Force was inappropriate.  We find no evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the documentation that has been submitted in support of applicant’s appeal, we do not believe he has suffered from an injustice.  Additionally, we note that the applicant has failed to provide the requested information regarding his activities since leaving the service.  Therefore, based on the available evidence of record, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-01009 in Executive Session on 6 October 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Vice Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 28 Mar 03, w/atch. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  FBI Report of Investigation.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 16 Apr 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 May 03.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 24 Jul 03.

                                   
                                   Vice Chair