RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-03100
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His undesirable discharge be upgraded.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was 16 years old and was not making enough money to feed his family.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a personal statement.  Applicant's submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 18 October 1951, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force with his mother’s consent in the grade of private for a period of four years.  His age at enlistment was 17 years and 20 days.  The highest rank attained by the applicant was A/3C (E-2).  Evidence in the record indicates that the applicant first applied for a Class Q Allotment for his spouse in July 1953.  According to the applicant’s DD Form 214, he was reduced to the grade of airman basic on 28 July 1954.  During his service, his character and efficiency were rated “excellent” on 1 December 1951 and 15 December 1951.  His character and efficiency were rated “good” and “satisfactory,” respectively, on 15 June 1952 and 19 February 1954.  His character and efficiency were rated “poor” and “unsatisfactory” on 8 November 1954.

The applicant was convicted by a Summary Court-Martial for being absent without leave (AWOL) 11-30 March 1952 and was confined at hard labor for 30 days and fined $25.  He was convicted by a Special Court-Martial for being AWOL from 3 September to 3 October 1952 and was confined at hard labor for three months and fined $126.  He received another Summary Court-Martial for being AWOL 2-28 July 1954 and was confined at hard labor for 30 days and fined $28.  

On 23 September 1954, the applicant’s commander initiated a statement recommending that the applicant be discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-17 because of unfitness.  On 5 October 1954, after consulting military legal counsel, he waived his entitlement to appear before a board and requested to be discharged without the benefit of board proceedings.  The discharge authority approved his request for separation on 2 November 1954.  The discharge authority directed that the applicant be discharged with an undesirable discharge.

The applicant was discharged from the Air Force on 8 November 1954 under the provisions of AFR 39-17 (unfitness) with an undesirable discharge.  He had served 2 years, 7 months and 20 days on active duty. Time lost was 151 days due to AWOL and confinement.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provided a copy of an investigative report pertaining to the applicant, which is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRSP states that they believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  Additionally, the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  Therefore, they recommend a denial of the applicant’s request.

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states that in his late years he feels like he was done wrong on the facts.  To start off he was 16 years old when he joined the Air Force.  His birthday had to be changed so that he could clear his social security, 9/28/34.  Second, he went AWOL one time for 30 days.  His pay was $73.00 a month.  He could not feed his family on this pay.

Applicant's complete response, with attachments, is 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 error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation 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.  Therefore, 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 14 January 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, undated, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPPRSP, dated 20 Oct 03.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Oct 03.
	Exhibit E.	FBI Report.
	Exhibit F.	Applicant’s Response, undated, w/atchs.