RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: 99-01084
                 INDEX CODE 106.00
      XXXXXXX          COUNSEL:  None

      XXXXXXX          HEARING DESIRED:  No

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His 1965 under-other-than-honorable-conditions  (UOTHC)  discharge  be
upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

At the time of his discharge he was 19 years old. He made one  mistake
and was not legally well represented. The  other  individual  involved
was honorably discharged.  He is now in his fifties,  has  never  been
arrested, has been married for 32 years and has two children  and  two
grandchildren.  Had his discharge happened  now  he  would  have  been
honorably discharged.

Applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 12 Aug 63.

An AF Office of Special Investigation (AFOSI)  inquiry  was  conducted
based on an airman’s  allegations  that  he  had  engaged  in  several
homosexual acts with the applicant. The applicant contended the airman
had blackmailed him into “passive” involvement.

On 22  Jan  65,  the  squadron  commander  advised  the  applicant  of
initiation of action against  him  under  AFR  35-66.   The  commander
indicated that if a court-martial action was  neither  applicable  nor
deemed appropriate, he would recommend administrative discharge with a
general characterization but that the discharge authority  would  make
final determination as to discharge characterization.  On 22  Jan  65,
after consulting with counsel, the applicant waived  his  right  to  a
hearing before a board of officers and did not  submit  statements  in
his  own  behalf.  He  indicated  he  understood  that  the  discharge
authority  could  direct  an  undesirable  discharge.   The   squadron
commander subsequently recommended  that  the  applicant  be  given  a
general discharge based on his admission of passive  participation  in
homosexual acts.  However,  on  5  Feb  65,  the  discharge  authority
directed separation with an undesirable discharge.

The applicant was subsequently discharged under the provisions of  AFR
39-17 (Unfitness) in the grade of airman second  class  on  11 Feb  65
with a UOTHC discharge and 1 year and 6 months of active service.

On 7 Sep 66, the Air Force Discharge Review Board  (AFDRB)  considered
and denied the applicant’s appeal for a general discharge (Exhibit C).

Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of  Investigation,
Washington, DC, indicated that on the basis  of  the  data  furnished,
they were unable to locate an arrest record (Exhibit D).

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Military Personnel Management Specialist, HQ AFPC/DPPRS,  reviewed
the case and provided his rationale for recommending denial.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit E.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In a letter dated 5 Nov 99, the AFBCMR Staff invited the applicant  to
provide post-service information, which he did with his rebuttal.

He describes his life since his  discharge.  His  father’s  death  and
burial as a veteran prompted him to ask for an upgraded discharge.  He
provides character references from his business partner, his attorney,
and the town chief of police.

His complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit H.

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.    Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate
the existence of probable error or injustice. We find  no  impropriety
in the characterization of applicant's discharge.  It appears that the
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 that 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 that 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 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.   Further,  under
today’s standards the applicant may very  well  have  been  discharged
with an honorable or general characterization since  this  episode  of
passive misconduct appears to have been an  anomaly.  Accordingly,  we
find that corrective action is appropriate as a matter of  equity  and
on the basis of clemency and recommend the discharge  be  upgraded  to
honorable.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that, on 11 February 1965,
he was honorably  discharged  and  furnished  an  Honorable  Discharge
certificate.

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 22 February 2000, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

                  Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
                  Ms. Marcia Jane Bachman, Member
                  Mr. Philip Sheuerman, Member

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

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Apr 99.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  AFDRB Brief, dated 7 Sep 66, w/atchs.
   Exhibit D.  FBI Report.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 22 Jul 99.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 16 Aug 99.
   Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 5 Nov 99.
   Exhibit H.  Letter, Applicant, dated 2 Dec 99, w/atchs.



                                   CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
                                   Panel Chair
AFBCMR 99-01084




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 11 February
1965, he was honorably discharged and furnished an Honorable Discharge
certificate.





   JOE G. LINEBERGER

   Director

   Air Force Review Boards Agency