RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-01346
		INDEX CODE:  110.02
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general discharge be upgraded to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

At the time of his discharge, he was rapidly pushed through the outprocessing procedure.  He believes there were many errors caused because of confusion and the need to get things done quickly.  He also believes his race was a contributing factor.  He served honorably for 4 years, and it has been almost 50 years since his discharge.  He has never asked the Air Force for anything, nor has he ever filed for any VA benefits.  He has led a simple life, and has been a law-abiding citizen since his discharge.  Because he is getting older, his discharge character is now of great concern to him.

In support of the application, the applicant submits a letter from the National Personnel Records Center dated 2 April 2004; a certified copy of his Separation Document, DD 214; a Soldier’s Qualification Card, DA 20; and an excerpted Report of Medical Examination (4 pages).  The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The former member’s records were damaged by fire in 1973 at the National Personnel Records Center, St. Louis, MO.  As a result, the following is the only known information pertaining to the applicant’s service and was extracted from the partially reconstructed record and from documents provided by the applicant.

On 5 December 1950 the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the age of 20 in the grade of airman basic (E-1) for a period of four (4) years.  He was progressively promoted to the rank of airman third class (E-2) with a date of rank of 1 October 1954.

The following is a resume of the character and efficiency ratings he received during his service.

		Character		Efficiency

4 January 1951	Excellent		Excellent
3 January 1953	Excellent		Satisfactory
23 January 1954	Poor		Unsatisfactory
14 September 1954	Good		Excellent

On 5 May 1953, the applicant was Absent Without Leave (AWOL) for six (6) days.  On 20 November 1953, the applicant was tried and convicted by a special court-martial for striking his superior non-commissioned officer, and committing assault upon another airman.  For this incident, he sentenced to confinement at hard labor for six (6) months, and forfeited $60.00 per month for a like period.  

On 22 January 1955, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10 by reason of expiration to term of service with a general discharge.  He had served 4 years on active duty.  He had 48 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.

In response to the Board’s request, the FBI indicated they were unable to identify with an arrest record pertaining to the applicant on the basis of information furnished (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS has no recommendation.  DPPRS states they are unable to determine the propriety of the discharge based on the lack of documentation in the applicant’s master personnel records.  Additionally, the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in his discharge processing, nor did he provide any facts to support changing the character of his service.  DPPRS defers to the Board to determine if the applicant should be granted relief.  The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force Evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment on 4 June 2004.  On 22 June 2004, the applicant was invited to submit information pertaining to his post-service accomplishments.  As of this date, this office has received no response to the before mentioned correspondence (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

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.  After careful consideration of the applicant’s request and the available evidence of record, we see no evidence that would warrant an upgrade to his discharge.  Although the applicant completed the term of his enlistment contract, we are aware that the governing regulation then in effect, AFR 39-10, authorized the issuance of a general discharge to those members being separated who did not have all character and efficiency ratings of at least “very good” and “excellent” or “unknown.”  From the applicant’s record of service, as supported by the record of his AWOL and conviction by a special court-martial, it appears that the decision was made that the applicant’s service did not warrant a fully honorable discharge.  The applicant has provided no evidence showing the contrary was the case, his service met the criteria for a fully honorable discharge, or the decision to separate him with an under honorable conditions discharge represents an abuse of discretionary authority.  In addition, other than his own assertions, he has provided no documentary evidence to substantiate that, in the years since his separation, he has been an upstanding member of the community.  Therefore, In view of all the above, the applicant’s request is not favorably considered.

________________________________________________________________

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 25 August 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with Docket Number BC-2004-01346:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 04 Apr 04, with attachments.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPRS, dated 27 May 2004.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Jun 04.
	Letter, AFBCMR, dated 22 Jun 04 and Negative FBI
	Report.