RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:		DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-02581
		INDEX CODE: 110.00
 						COUNSEL:  NONE
HEARING DESIRED:  NO

______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His undesirable discharge be upgraded.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The two honorable discharges he received should override his undesirable discharge and his court-martial was unfair.

In support of his request, the applicant submits a copy of his WDAGO Form No 55 - Honorable Discharge from the Army of the United States, his honorable discharge certificates and character reference letters.

His complete submission, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant served in the Regular Army from 29 January 1945 through 18 November 1946.  He served in the Army Air Force from 25 November 1947 through 15 December 1950.  He reenlisted in the Regular Air Force on 16 December 1950.  On 26 March 1951, he was restricted to the limits of the base (Albrook AFB, Canal Zone) for 90 days for medical reasons.  On 30 March 1951, he violated the restriction.  Consequently, he was tried and convicted by a Summary Court Martial and was sentenced to 25 days hard labor and forfeiture of $50.00.  On 17 April 1951, he was notified that a Board of Officers was meeting to determine if he should be discharged prior to his expiration of term of service.  On the same day, he acknowledged receipt of the meeting and elected not to consult counsel or call witnesses on his behalf.  On 20 April 1951, the Board determined he was unfit for service and recommended he be discharged for unfitness.  On 22 May 1951 he was discharged in the grade of private and received an undesirable discharge. 

He served five years, two months and six days on active duty.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, WV, indicated on 22 October 2007, that, on the basis of data furnished, they are unable to locate an arrest record (Exhibit C).

On 14 November 2007, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for response within 30 days.  As of this date no response has been received (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.  The Board finds no impropriety in the characterization of applicant's discharge.  It appears that responsible officials applied appropriate standards in effecting the separation, and the Board does not find persuasive evidence that pertinent regulations were violated or that applicant was not afforded all the rights to which entitled at the time of discharge.  The applicant has not shown the characterization of the discharge was contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation, nor has it been shown the nature of the discharge was unduly harsh or disproportionate to the offenses committed.  Considered alone, the Board concludes the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances.  

4.  Consideration of this Board, however, is not limited to the events which precipitated the discharge.  The Board has a Congressional mandate which permits consideration of other factors; e.g., applicant's background, the overall quality of service, and post-service activities and accomplishments.  Further, the Board may base their decision on matters of equity and clemency rather than simply on whether rules and regulations which existed at the time were followed.  This is a much broader consideration than officials involved in the discharge were permitted, and our decision in no way discredits the validity of theirs.

5.  Taking into consideration the available post-service information and the absence of involvement with law enforcement authorities, it appears likely that he has overcome the behavioral traits which led to the discharge action and has led a stable and productive life since the separation.  The Board majority recognizes the adverse impact of the discharge the applicant received; and, while it may have been appropriate at the time, the Board majority believes it would be an injustice for the applicant to continue to suffer its effects.  Accordingly, the Board majority finds that corrective action is appropriate on the basis of clemency and recommends the records be corrected as indicated below.  

______________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMEDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that that on 22 May 1951, he was discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions).

________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2007-02581 in Executive Session on 18 December 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

By a majority vote, the Board voted to correct the record as recommended.  XXXXXXXXXX voted to deny the request but did not desire to submit a minority report.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

       Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 August 2007, w/atchs.
       Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
       Exhibit C.  FBI Negative Reply.
       Exhibit D.  Memorandum, SAF/MRBC, dated 14 November 2007.