RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04404 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His “undesirable” discharge be upgraded to Honorable. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was very young and did not understand the reason for his discharge, as he was separated from his wife at the time of the incident. He appealed to the Discharge Review Board in 1955 because he wanted to reenlist. Now he is applying because he wants to be able to say he is an honorably discharged veteran. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 11 Jun 53. On 7 Nov 53, the applicant received non-judicial punishment under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for being Absent Without Leave (AWOL) from 7 Nov 53 to 9 Nov 53. On 22 Nov 53, the applicant received an Article 15 for “failure to repair” from 0745 to 1500 hours. On 14 Jun 54, the applicant was convicted in a civilian court of the charge of adultery for having sexual relations with a 16 year old girl, who was not his wife. He was sentenced to nine months in jail (suspended) and was placed on probation for one year. On 16 Jun 54, the applicant received an Article 15 for “failure to repair.” On 23 Jun 54, the applicant’s commander recommended him for discharge based upon his conviction in civilian court. On 9 Jul 54, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-22 (Conviction by civilian court) and furnished an undesirable discharge certificate. On 14 Mar 55, the Air Force Discharge Review Board considered the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge to honorable and determined he had submitted insufficient evidence to warrant an upgrade. On 11 Jan 13, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C). ________________________________________________________________ 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 find no evidence of an error or injustice that occurred in the discharge processing. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the commander's discretionary authority. The applicant has provided no evidence which would lead us to believe the characterization of the service was contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation, unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses committed. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge on the basis of clemency; however, in the absence of any information related to his activities since leaving the service, we are not persuaded that it would be in the interest of justice to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists to grant the relief sought in this application. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2012-04404 in Executive Session on 4 Jun 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Sep 12, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 7 May 13, w/atch.