RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  99-00659
            INDEX NUMBER:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His 13 June 1954 dishonorable discharge be upgraded to honorable.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

This was an isolated incident that occurred in his youth,  that  there
have been no recurrences since his discharge, and that the  punishment
seemed to be too severe for the crime.

In support of his appeal, applicant provided documentation  pertaining
to his post-service activities in the form of certificates of training
and appreciation, performance evaluations,  and  numerous  letters  of
character reference from  employers,  co-workers,  and  his  landlord.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

It appears that the applicant’s records were  destroyed  in  the  1973
fire in the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC).   The  applicant
did obtain a Certificate of Military Service from the NPRC  indicating
that he served as a member of the Army of the  United  States  from  1
December 1952 to 13 June 1954; that his service was terminated with  a
dishonorable discharge; and that his last grade, rank  or  rating  was
prisoner.  However, this certificate is in error as he was in the  Air
Force.

The Staff Judge Advocate’s Review of Record of Trial by General Court-
Martial, dated  28  August  1953,  reflects  that  the  applicant  was
convicted by general court-martial of stealing a radio from  a  fellow
airman and stealing $10 from a local business.  He was sentenced to  a
dishonorable discharge, total forfeiture of pay  and  allowances,  and
confinement at hard labor for 18 months.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of  Investigation,
Clarksburg, WV, provided a copy of a FBI Identification Record,  which
is attached at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Associate Chief, Military Justice Division,  AFLSA/JAJM,  reviewed
this application and recommended  that  the  Board,  as  a  matter  of
clemency, grant the applicant relief  by  upgrading  his  dishonorable
discharge to a bad conduct discharge.  JAJM stated, in part, that  the
applicant contends that his  record  has  "remained  clean  after  the
service” and that he believes he has learned from his  mistakes.   The
dishonorable discharge  adjudged  by  the  court-martial  is  directly
attributable to the applicant’s misconduct.  The sentence imposed  was
within  the  legal  limits  for  the  offenses   committed.    However
commendable his conduct may have been  following  his  discharge,  the
applicant’s discharge is a characterization of his  military  service,
not of his post-military life.  His misconduct does not  rise  to  the
level of what is normally deemed dishonorable conduct.  Bad conduct is
the most appropriate characterization of the applicant’s service.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 16 November 1999, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was  forwarded
to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days.  At that time,
the  applicant  was  also  invited  to  provide  additional   evidence
pertaining to his activities since leaving the  service  (Exhibit  E).
As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

On 14 August 2000, the FBI Report of Investigation  was  forwarded  to
the applicant for review and comment (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.  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.  Considered alone, we conclude  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.  We  have  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, we may base our 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.  Under our broader mandate and after careful consideration  of  all
the facts and circumstances of applicant’s case, we are persuaded that
applicant  has  overcome  the  behavioral  traits  which  led  to  the
contested discharge and has been a productive member of  society.   We
recognize the adverse impact of the discharge applicant received; and,
while it may have been appropriate at the time, we believe it would be
an injustice for applicant to continue to  suffer  its  effects.   His
post military life clearly evidences one  of  honorable  service  that
outweighs the misconduct of his  youth.   Accordingly,  we  find  that
corrective action is appropriate as a matter  of  equity  and  on  the
basis of clemency.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 13 June 1954, he
was honorably discharged and furnished an Honorable Discharge
certificate.

________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 21 September 2000, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

      Mr. Gregory H. Petkoff, Panel Chair
      Mr. William E. Edwards, Member
      Mr. John E. Pettit, Member

All members  voted  to  correct  the  records,  as  recommended.   The
following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 16 Mar 99, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  FBI Report of Investigation.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, Letter, AFLSA/JAJM, dated 26 Oct 99.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 16 Nov 99.
     Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 14 Aug 00.




                                   GREGORY H. PETKOFF
                                   Panel Chair



AFBCMR 99-00659




MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air
Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the
authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat
116), it is directed that:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on
13 June 1954, he was honorably discharged and furnished an Honorable
Discharge certificate.







            JOE G. LINEBERGER
            Director
            Air Force Review Boards
            Agency