RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: 01-03040

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He requested to be discharged once he began experiencing difficulty  dealing
with an aircraft accident recovery detail in which he participated.

The applicant states that while assigned to  the  motor  pool,  he  assisted
medical personnel in the recovery of an aircraft and its victims.   He  told
his commander he was having trouble dealing with it  (i.e.,  not  eating  or
sleeping) and wanted to be discharged.  The commander  told  him  he  could,
but that he would have to receive and undesirable discharge; however,  after
his discharge he could request the Veterans Administration (VA) upgrade  his
discharge to general.  He did so assuming  that  the  VA  had  upgraded  his
discharge, but they did not.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 28 May 1954, the applicant enlisted  in  the  Regular  Air  Force  for  a
period of four years.

On 6 September 1955, the applicant was notified  by  the  commander  of  his
intent to impose nonjudicial punishment under  Article  15  of  the  Uniform
Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)  for  being  found  drunk  in  his  room  in
violation of Article 134.  The applicant waived his right to trial by court-
martial and accepted the punishment  that  consisted  of  reduction  to  the
grade of airman basic.  He did not appeal the punishment.

The applicant appeared before a board  of  medical  officers  on  27 January
1956 and it was  determined  that  while  he  was  mentally  and  physically
qualified to perform his duties, he had no place in  military  life  due  to
his  resentment  of  regimentation,  below  standard  work,  and   extremely
negative attitude.

On 6 March  1956,  the  applicant  was  recommended  for  discharge  by  his
commander for unclean habits, repeatedly committed  offenses,  and  being  a
habitual shirker.  The applicant waived his right to a hearing.

The applicant was discharged on 26 March 1956, under the provisions  of  AFR
39-17, with service characterized as undesirable.  He completed  1  year,  9
months, and 29 days.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation  (FBI),
has provided an investigative report which is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be granted, if  an  FBI  check  proves
negative, considering the discharge was over  45  years  ago,  the  type  of
offenses and the member’s  statement.   AFPC/DPPRS  states,  in  part,  that
based upon the documentation in the file, they  believe  the  discharge  was
consistent  with  the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements   of   the
discharge regulation at that time.

The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states that he has been married to  the  same  woman  for  the
last 48 years and been active in his church.  The FBI  report  contains  the
name of his uncle (i.e., XXXXXXXX), and the other names, he does  not  know.
He has always used the name XXXXXX and the only arrest he can  remember  was
for being drunk and one time he was  stopped  with  his  brother-in-law  and
unknown to him, there was “white lightening” in the car.

The applicant’s complete response 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.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of probable error or injustice.  After  thoroughly  reviewing  the
evidence of record and noting the applicant’s complete submission,  we  find
no evidence of error or injustice.   In  this  respect,  we  note  that  the
applicant’s discharge appears to be in compliance  with  the  governing  Air
Force Regulation in effect  at  the  time  of  his  separation  and  he  was
afforded all the rights to which entitled.  The applicant  has  provided  no
evidence to indicate that his separation was  inappropriate.  Therefore,  in
view of the above, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary,  we  find
no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

4.  We also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that  the
discharge be upgraded on the basis of  clemency.   We  have  considered  the
applicant's overall quality of service, the events  which  precipitated  the
discharge, and available evidence related  to  his  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  Docket  Number  01-03040  in
Executive Session on 16 April 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Vice Chair
                       Mr. George Franklin, Member
                       Mrs. Carolyn J. Watkins, Member





The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 Nov 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 20 Nov 01.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Dec 01.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 11 Jan 02.
    Exhibit F.  Investigative Report, FBI.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Mar 02.
    Exhibit H.  Letter, Applicant, dated 1 Apr 02.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Vice Chair