RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  01-01015
            INDEX NUMBER:  110.02

            COUNSEL:  DVA

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable or  general  (under
honorable conditions).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was offered a choice of reassignment to Japan or to  be  discharged
due to inability to adjust to military life.   He  says  that  if  the
undesirable discharge and how it would have affected his  entitlements
and benefits had been explained to him, he might have made a different
choice.

In support of  his  appeal,  applicant  submitted  statements  from  a
friend, and past and present employers.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Based on the available military records,  applicant  enlisted  in  the
Regular Air Force on 28 Aug 51 in the grade of airman basic  (E-1/AB).


Applicant received character and efficiency ratings of excellent  from
28 Aug 51 – 11 Nov 51; and from 12 Nov 51 – 26 Feb 52,  his  character
rating was good and his efficiency rating was satisfactory.

On 4 Feb 52, applicant was  convicted  by  Summary  Court-Martial  for
being drunk and disorderly in a public place.   He  was  sentenced  to
forfeiture of $53.00.

On 13 Nov 52, applicant was convicted  by  Summary  Court-Martial  for
being absent without leave (AWOL) from 30 Oct 52  until  on  or  about
12 Nov 52.  He was sentenced to confinement at hard  labor  (CHL)  for
one month and forfeiture of $50.00 for one month.

On 28 Oct 53, applicant was convicted  by  Summary  Court-Martial  for
again being AWOL from 4 Oct 53 until on or about 24 Oct  53.   He  was
sentenced to CHL for one month and forfeiture of $60.00.

A Report of Proceedings  of  Board  of  Officers  convened  under  the
provisions of AFR 39-17,  on  19  November  1953,  reflects  that  the
applicant was  found  to  have  evidenced  traits  of  character  that
rendered  his  retention  in  the  service  undesirable.   The   Board
recommended discharge from the service because of unfitness,  with  an
undesirable discharge.

On 9 Dec 53, he was discharged under the provisions of  AFR  39-17  by
reason of traits of character which render retention  in  the  service
undesirable, with an undesirable discharge.  He was  credited  with  2
years and 11 days active service (excludes 93 days of lost time  under
Art 140, Sec 6a, MCM, 1951).

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of  Investigation,
Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative report  which  is
attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The  Separation  Procedures  Section,  HQ  AFPC/DPPRS,  reviewed  this
application and recommended denial.  They found that the discharge was
consistent with the procedural and  substantive  requirements  of  the
discharge regulation.  Additionally, that the discharge was within the
sound  discretion  of  the  discharge  authority.   Even  though   the
applicant provided character references over the  past  20  years  and
though it has been over 48 years since his discharge, it still doesn’t
warrant an upgrade since  his  entire  two  years  were  plagued  with
problems.  They also noted that the applicant did not submit  any  new
evidence or identify any errors or injustices  that  occurred  in  the
discharge processing, nor did  he  provide  any  facts  warranting  an
upgrade of the discharge.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant responded to the Air Force evaluation,  by  letter  dated  6
September 2001.  In his  letter,  he  explained  the  quality  of  his
service and some of the training he received prior to  his  discharge.
He also noted  his  conduct  and  accomplishments  since  leaving  the
service (Exhibit G).

_________________________________________________________________



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.  It appears that responsible
officials applied appropriate standards in effecting  the  applicant’s
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.  Nevertheless, while we do  not  condone  the  behavior
that led to the applicant’s discharge, he has had  to  live  with  its
adverse effects  for  almost  48  years.   Based  on  the  letters  of
character reference provided in the  applicant’s  behalf,  it  appears
that he has been  a  responsible  citizen  and  productive  member  of
society.  Therefore, we find that an upgrade of  the  characterization
of his discharge to general, under honorable conditions, is  warranted
on the basis of clemency.   An  Honorable  Discharge  was  considered;
however, in view of his overall record of service, we do  not  believe
that an upgrade of his discharge to fully honorable is warranted.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 9 Dec 1953, he was
discharged with service  characterized  as  general  (under  honorable
conditions).

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 2 October 2001, under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:

                 Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Vice Chair
                 Ms. Diane Arnold, Member
                 Mr. John E. B. Smith, Member

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

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Mar 01, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  FBI Report of Investigation.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 10 May 01.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 15 Jun 01.
     Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 7 Aug 01, w/atchs.
     Exhibit G.  Letter, Applicant Response, dated 6 Sep 01.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Vice Chair



AFBCMR 01-01015




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 9  Dec  1953,
he  was  discharged  with  service  characterized  as  general  (under
honorable conditions).






            JOE G. LINEBERGER
            Director
            Air Force Review Boards Agency