RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00998
            INDEX CODE: 100.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was young and immature at the time of his discharge and has since led  an
exemplary life.

The applicant states that since his discharge he was worked 42  years  as  a
truck driver, been married for almost 40 years, owned his own home, and  has
had no legal problems of any kind.  He has  seven  grandchildren  and  would
like to pass  on  the  fact  that  he  has  a  good  discharge  and  not  an
undesirable one.

In support of the appeal, the applicant submits extracts from  his  military
records.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant  contracted  his  enlistment  in  the   Regular   Air   Force   on
13 September 1951 for a period of four years.

He was tried by a Summary Court-Martial on 24  April  1952  for  failing  to
report to duty on 29 March 1952 and for breaking restrictions  on  15  April
1952.  He pled guilty to the charges, was found guilty, and sentenced to  30
days of confinement at hard labor and forfeiture of $50.00 pay.



On 22 April 1952, the applicant received notification that he was to meet  a
Board of Officers to determine his unfitness for further  retention  in  the
military based on his demonstrated  misconduct  and  character  traits  that
rendered him unsuitable for retention.  The Board of Officers met on  8  May
1952, and found him not  fit  for  retention  and  that  he  had  repeatedly
committed minor  infractions  of  rules  and  regulations.   Based  on  this
finding, the Board of Officers directed his discharge for unfitness with  an
undesirable discharge.   On  4  June  1952,  he  was  discharged  under  the
provisions of AFR 39-17 (Unfitness), with  service  characterized  as  Under
Other than Honorable Conditions  (UOTHC),  and  was  issued  an  undesirable
discharge certificate.  He had completed a total of 8  months  and  22  days
and was serving in the grade of airman basic at the time of discharge.

On  13  November  1952,  the  Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Board   (AFDRB)
considered and  denied  his  request  that  his  discharge  be  upgraded  to
honorable.

Pursuant to the  Board's  request,  the  Federal  Bureau  of  Investigation,
Clarksburg, WV, provided  an  investigative  report  which  is  attached  at
Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS states, in part, that since his discharge occurred over 50  years
ago and considering the applicant’s young age at the time,  they  would  not
object if the AFBCMR granted his request, provided a search of  FBI  records
does not reveal any subsequent convictions.

The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Since his discharge he has been employed as a truck driver for 30-years,  he
is a retired member of the Teamsters, he has been married for 40 years,  and
raised five children.  Based of his demonstrated continuous  and  productive
employment while raising a family and since he had a  problem  with  alcohol
while in the service, his discharge should be upgraded.

In  further  support  of  the  appeal,  the  applicant   submits   character
references.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________


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.   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 4 June  1952,  he  was  discharged
with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions).

_________________________________________________________________





The following members of the Board considered  Docket  Number  BC-2003-00998
in Executive Session on 8 October 2003, under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                       Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
                       Ms. Martha Maust, Member
                       Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Member

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

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 12 Mar 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 16 Apr 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Apr 03.
    Exhibit E.  FBI Investigative Report.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 9 Sep 03, w/atchs.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair

AFBCMR BC-2003-00998




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 4 June 1952, he was
discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable
conditions).








JOE G. LINEBERGER

Director

Air Force Review Boards Agency