RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:            DOCKET NUMBER:  98-02822
                             INDEX CODE:  110.00

                       COUNSEL:  NONE

                       HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be  upgraded  to
an honorable discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was found guilty by summary court martial and special court  martial  for
being absent without leave (AWOL).

He was three days late reporting back from a weekend visit home.   For  this
offense he was court-martialed and sentenced to 30 day's confinement.

Due to family hardships involving his mother he was AWOL for six  days.   He
was court-martialed and received six months confinement.

While in confinement, he was asked if he wanted to be  discharged.   If  so,
he had to immediately sign the paperwork.  It was  also  suggested  that  he
would be released in a short  period  of  time.   He  signed  the  paperwork
without reading or understanding  the  mistake  he  was  making.   His  only
thought was he was going to receive an early release from  confinement.   He
was not released early, he served his full sentence.  After several days  at
home he read his paperwork and found that he  received  an  UOTHC.   He  was
hurt and ashamed.  He has kept this part of  his  life  a  secret  from  his
family for 40 years.

He states that he is married with three  children  and  four  grandchildren.
He recently celebrated his 40th wedding anniversary.  He  has  been  a  good
citizen and loves his country.  He has this one bad mark in his life and  he
knows that a member of his family may someday see it and he  would  like  to
change it.

Please consider the date he signed his discharge paperwork and the  date  of
confinement.  He states he was a young man, not very smart,  in  confinement
and asked to make a quick decision without counsel.

In support of his request, he submits a personal statement.

Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 31 May 1955 in the  grade  of
airman basic for a period of four (4) years.

On 14 November 1957, applicant’s commander recommended  that  the  applicant
be discharged from the service by  reason  of  unfitness.   The  commander’s
reason for this action was applicant had received repeated counseling in  an
effort to correct his attitude and performance.  Despite  varied  counseling
and supervisory approaches his  performance  had  been  unsatisfactory.   He
refused to begin the on-the-job training (OJT)  program  for  upgrading  and
had made no effort at all to improve his value as an airman.  Applicant  had
repeatedly been late to work with no valid excuse.   Although  he  had  been
court-martialed  twice  for  being  AWOL,  he  showed  every  indication  of
persisting in  being  AWOL.   Applicant  had  indicated  his  desire  to  be
discharged and even while in confinement attempted to be discharge as  being
a homosexual.  Because of lack of evidence  and  the  manner  in  which  the
request was made, his request was rejected.  (Exhibit B).

On 1 March 1957 he was tried and  convicted  by  summary  court-martial  for
being AWOL from 11 February through 17 February 1957.  He was  sentenced  to
forfeit $30 and confinement at hard labor for 30 days.

On 11 April 1957, he was tried and convicted by  special  court-martial  for
being AWOL from 18 March  through  27  March  1957.   He  was  sentenced  to
forfeit $55 per month for a like period and confinement at  hard  labor  for
six months.

On 14 November  1957,  applicant  voluntarily  submitted  a  request  to  be
discharge and indicated in his application that his entitlement to  a  board
hearing and he elected to waive that right.   Applicant  also  indicated  in
his application that he understood that if his application was approved  his
discharge could be an undesirable  discharge.   He  further  indicated  that
legal counsel had been made available to him.

On 26 November 1957, the discharge  authority  approved  the  recommendation
for discharge  for  unfitness  and  directed  the  applicant  be  issued  an
undesirable discharge.

On 4 December 1957, he was discharged in the grade of  airman  basic,  under
the provisions of AFR 39-17 (Unfitness), and received an  under  other  than
honorable (UOTHC) discharge.  He served 1 year 11 months and 20  days  total
active duty with 198 days lost time.

Pursuant to the  Board’s  request,  the  Federal  Bureau  of  Investigation,
Washington, D.C., provided an  investigative  report  that  is  attached  at
Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Director of Personnel Program Management, HQ  AFPC/DPPRS,  reviewed  the
application  and  states  that  the  discharge  was  consistent   with   the
procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and  was
within the discretion of the discharge authority and that the applicant  was
provided full administrative due process.   The  records  indicate  member’s
military service was reviewed and appropriate action was  taken.   Applicant
did not submit evidence or identify any errors  in  the  discharge  process.
Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant’s request.

A complete of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Upon   the   Board’s   request,   applicant   has   provided    post-service
documentation, that is attached at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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.     We  find  no  impropriety  in  the  characterization  of  applicant's
discharge.   It  appears  that  responsible  officials  applied  appropriate
standards in effecting  the  separation,  and  we  do  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.   We
conclude,  therefore,  that  the  discharge  proceedings  were  proper   and
characterization  of  the  discharge  was  appropriate   to   the   existing
circumstances.

4.    We also find insufficient evidence to warrant  a  recommendation  that
the discharge be upgraded on the basis  of  clemency.   We  have  considered
applicant's overall quality of service, the events  which  precipitated  the
discharge, and available evidence related  to  post-service  activities  and
accomplishments.  On balance, we do not believe that clemency is warranted.

_________________________________________________________________

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 26 May 1999, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                  Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Panel Chair
                  Mr. Charles E. Bennett, Member
                  Mr. Jackson A. Hauslein, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 Oct 98, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 16 Nov 98.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 30 Nov 98.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 17 Feb 99, w/atchs.





                                THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                Panel Chair