RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-01480
		INDEX CODE:  110.02

	XXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  NONE

	XXXXXXX	HEARING DESIRED: NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He would feel very honored to have an honorable discharge and is very sorry for his actions during his military service.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 9 Nov 51 for a period of four years in the grade of airman basic.  Prior to the events under review, applicant was promoted to the grade of airman third class.  

On 7 Oct 52, applicant received an Article 15 for operating a government vehicle while intoxicated.  His punishment consisted of reduction in grade to airman basic.  

On 30 Jan 53, applicant was convicted by Summary Court-Martial for failure to repair and breaking curfew.  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor (CHL) for seven days and forfeiture of $28.80.

On 18 Aug 53, he was convicted by Summary Court-Martial for wrongful appropriation of a bicycle.  He was sentenced to CHL for 24 days, 24 days restriction, and forfeiture of $28.80.

On 2 Sep 53, he was convicted by Special Court-Martial for wrongful appropriation of a weapons carrier and attempting to sell 46 lbs of coffee which was stolen from the mess hall.  His sentence consisted of restriction to the base for 2 months, reduction in grade to airman basic, and forfeiture of $25 per month for 5 months.

On 2 Nov 53, he was convicted by Summary Court-Martial for breaking restriction on or about 26 Oct 53.  He was sentenced to CHL for 30 days and forfeiture of $25.

On 25 Sep 53, applicant received a medical evaluation stating he had no physical or mental conditions warranting separation under the provisions of AFM 35-4.

On 8 Oct 53, applicant was suspected of theft of day room funds.  He was discharged from his duties in the day room.

On 20 Oct 53, he was out of uniform on base.  For this misconduct, he received a letter of reprimand.

On 25 Oct 53, applicant was out of uniform off base.  For this misconduct, he received an offense report.

On 4 Nov 53, the commander initiated administrative discharge action and requested a board of officers to convene to evaluate applicant for possible separation for unfitness, stating that the applicant was considered unfit for continued service in the Air Force due to the reasons as listed above.  

On 18 Dec 53, applicant waived his entitlement to appear before a board of officers and requested discharge in lieu of board proceedings.  

On 31 Dec 53, the numbered Air Force commander recommended the applicant be discharged and indicated the staff judge advocate had reviewed the case.

On 8 Jan 54, the discharge authority approved a general discharge and directed that the applicant be issued a DD Form 257AF, “General Discharge Certificate.”  On 4 Feb 54, applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-16, with service characterized as under honorable conditions.  He was credited with a total of 2 years, 1 month, and 19 days of active duty service (excludes 37 days lost time due to CHL).

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommended applicant’s request be denied.  Based on available documentation in the file, they found the discharge consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  Additionally, the discharge was within the sound discretion of the discharge authority.  They also noted applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing and provided no other facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge.  

A complete copy of the 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 1 Jul 04 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E).

On 17 Aug 04, a copy of the FBI report was forwarded to the applicant for comment.  At that time, the applicant was also invited to provide additional evidence pertaining to his activities since leaving the service (Exhibit F).  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

___________________________________________________________________

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 regulation 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.  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-2004-01480 in Executive Session on 19 October 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 May 04. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  FBI Report of Investigation.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 25 Jun 04.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Jul 04.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 17 Jul 04, w/atchs.