RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-00467
							INDEX CODE:  110.00
    							COUNSEL:  NONE

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  13 AUGUST 2006

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He can not justify his actions during his military service other than he was very young and came from a dysfunctional sexually abused home environment.  The Air Force seemed to be a good way to break away and his mother agreed he should enlist.  The two summary courts-martial and the two 30-day incarcerations in the stockade helped him to grow up.  He has never been in trouble since leaving the military.  He has owned and operated bowling centers for over 25 years.  He has been married since 3 May 1963, raised four children and has six grandchildren and one great-grandchild.  He deserved the punishments he received from the Air Force but firmly believes he deserves an upgrade of his general discharge to honorable because the military setting contributed, in part, to his continued downward spiral.  His days on earth are short and he would like to have an honorable discharge from the Air Force so that his legacy at least to his children and grandchildren can be complete.  He has been a model citizen since his discharge.

Applicant provides no supporting documentation.  Applicant’s submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 5 April 1960, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force in the grade of airman basic (E-1) for a period of 4 years.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of airman third class (E-2), with a date of rank of 6 June 1960 and 9 December 1960.  He was reduced to the grade of airman basic with a date of rank of 20 September 1960 and 12 July 1962, pursuant an Article 15 and summary court-martial.  

From 5 September 1960 to 7 September 1960, he was charged with being Absent Without Leave (AWOL).  For this incident, he was tried and convicted by a summary court-martial.  He was reduced to airman basic, sentenced to perform hard labor for thirty (30) days (suspended for 120 days), and to forfeit thirty ($30) dollars of his pay.  

On 4 February 1962, he was arrested by civil police on an open charge.  Specifically, it was reported he created a disorder by drinking beer in a car in the company of a female minor.  For this incident, he received a Letter of Reprimand.  

On 12 April 1962, a letter of indebtedness was received.  It was indicated he was in the arrears of $30.00 or five payments to his account.  On 11 May 1962, the company requested a return of the merchandise.

On 20 April 1962, a letter of indebtedness was received.  It was indicated that, on 10 February 1962, he had secured a loan in the amount of $483.19 payable by 24 payments each, on which he had made no payments.

On 12 July 1962, punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) was imposed on the applicant for being absent from his duty section for one and a half hours without proper authority.  For this incident, he was reduced to basic airman.

On 9 August 1962, he was convicted by summary court martial for wrongfully appropriating and pawning a Parker Pen Set of another airman.  He was sentenced to 30 days of confinement and $40 forfeiture of his pay.  

On 14 September 1962, following an interview with the applicant based on his commander’s request for a psychiatric evaluation, the examining physician indicated the appropriate diagnosis in the applicant’s case was inadequate personality.  The examining physician concluded the applicant was unfit for further military service and should be administratively discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-16 (Unsuitability).

On 27 August 1962, discharge proceedings were initiated against the applicant under the provisions of AFR 39-17 (Unfitness).   The applicant was advised of his rights in the matter and that an undesirable discharge would be recommended.  After consulting military legal counsel, the applicant waived his right to a hearing before a board of officers and declined to submit statements in his own behalf.  The applicant further indicated he understood that if an undesirable discharge was approved, his discharge would be under conditions other than honorable.  The discharge case file was reviewed and found legally sufficient on 9 October 1962.  On 12 October 1962, the discharge authority approved the recommended separation and directed the applicant be issued a General Discharge certificate.  On 17 October 1962, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-17 (Unfitness), with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  He was credited with 2 years, 4 months and 21 days of total active service.  Time lost was 52 days due to AWOL and confinement.

On 24 March 2005, a request to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) was made and no other arrest records were found.  

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied.  DPPRS states that based upon the documentation in the file, they conclude the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and that the applicant did not identify any errors or injustices in the discharge processing.  The Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C.  

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 18 March 2005, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was sent to the applicant for review and response.  On 25 March 2005, a letter was forwarded to applicant suggesting that he consider providing evidence pertaining to his post-service activities.  As of this date, this office has not received a response to any of the foregoing 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 of his characterization of service.  Other than his own assertions, the applicant has provided no evidence which would lead us to believe the information in his discharge case file is erroneous, that his substantial rights were violated, or that his commanders abused their discretionary authority.  However, should the applicant provide evidence pertaining to his post service activities, testimonials of friends and responsible citizens who know him, he may, of course, submit a request for clemency at a later time.  

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing 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 19 April 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

Panel Chair
Member
Member

The following documentary evidence was considered for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2005-00467:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 Feb 05.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 10 Mar 05.
     Exhibit D.  Letters, SAF/MRBR, AFBCMR, dated 18 Mar 05 
                 and 25 Mar 05.

                                  
                                  Panel Chair