RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01494
            INDEX CODE:  110.02

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He made a mistake that has followed him for  over  23  years.   His
race presented some trying times during his military  service.   He
has contributed to his country and regrets his mistake.

In support of his appeal, applicant submitted  a  copy  of  letters
from members  of  congress;  a  copy  of  his  resume;  letters  of
character reference from  his  former  employers;  certificates  of
appreciation.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Prior to the period of service under review, applicant enlisted  in
the US Army on 28 Jan 46, and on 10 Jan 48, he transferred  to  the
Air Force.  He was honorably  discharged  on  4  Feb  49.   He  was
credited with 2 years and 29 days of  active  service  [excludes  8
days of lost time due to being absent without leave (AWOL)].

On 17 May 49, he enlisted  in  the  Enlisted  Reserve  Corps  as  a
sergeant for three years, with a 12-month extension.  Applicant was
AWOL from 31 Dec 50 - 1 Jan 51.  On 29 May 51, he was convicted  by
Summary Court-Martial for being AWOL from on or  about  18  May  51
until 21 May 51.  He was sentenced to reduction in grade to  airman
basic (suspended) and forfeiture of  $58.   On  15 Dec 52,  he  was
honorably discharged in the grade of airman first class.

On 16 Dec 52, he reenlisted in the Air Force Reserve for 3 years in
the grade of airman first class.  During this time, he was promoted
to grade of staff sergeant with a DOR of 1 Dec 54 and was honorably
discharged on 13 Jan 55.
He enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 14 Jan 55 for a  period  of
four years.

On 3 Jul 56, applicant was convicted by Special Court  Martial  for
being AWOL from o/a 4 Dec 55 until o/a 18 Jun 56.  He was sentenced
to confinement at hard labor (CHL) for six months and forfeiture of
$44 for six months and reduction in grade to airman basic.

After completing 45 days of  the  confinement,  he  went  AWOL  and
remained absent until the initiation of  his  discharge  processing
(10 Jul 74).

On  10  Jul  74,  the  group  commander  initiated   administrative
discharge action against the applicant for unfitness.  The specific
reason for the proposed action was desertion,  in  that,  applicant
was AWOL from 3 Jan 57 until he was dropped from the rolls on 1 Feb
57.

On 13 Jul 74,  applicant  acknowledged  receipt  of  the  discharge
notification and that military counsel was available  to  him.   On
16 Jul 74, he waived his right to appear before  an  administrative
discharge board and waived his right to submit  statements  in  his
own behalf.  He further acknowledged that he understood that if his
application was approved, his separation could be under  conditions
other than honorable and  that  he  could  receive  an  undesirable
discharge, and that this may deprive him of veterans’ benefits.  On
2 Aug 74, the group Staff Judge Advocate  found  the  case  legally
sufficient.

On 23 Aug 74, the Numbered Air Force Staff Judge Advocate found the
case legally sufficient to support discharge for misconduct  as  an
absentee or deserter.  In addition, based on the very nature of the
offense, i.e., an unauthorized absence of some 18 years,  probation
and rehabilitation were deemed unfeasible  and  inappropriate.   On
26 Aug 74,  the  Numbered  AF  commander  approved  the  discharge,
without P&R.

On 5 Sep 74, applicant  was  discharged  under  the  provisions  of
AFM 39-12, with service characterized as under other than honorable
conditions and was issued an undesirable discharge certificate.  He
was credited with 1 year and 10 days of active duty service  during
this enlistment (excludes 6800 days due to  confinement,  AWOL  and
desertion).

On 21  Oct  88,  the  Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Board  (AFDRB)
considered and denied applicant’s request  to  have  his  discharge
upgraded.

Pursuant  to  the  Board’s   request,   the   Federal   Bureau   of
Investigation, Clarksburg, WV, indicated on 31 July 2003, that,  on
the basis of data furnished, they are unable to  locate  an  arrest
record.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommended his request be denied.  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.  They also noted that the applicant did not  submit  any
new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred  in
the discharge processing  and  that  he  provided  no  other  facts
warranting an upgrade of the discharge.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  the  applicant
on 4 Jun 03 for review and comment within  30  days.   As  of  this
date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).

___________________________________________________________________

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 error  or  injustice.   The  discharge
appears to be in compliance with the governing regulations  and  we
find no evidence to indicate that applicant’s separation  from  the
Air Force was inappropriate.  The discharge action is supported  by
the evidence  of  record;  specifically,  applicant’s  unauthorized
absences and subsequently being dropped from the rolls  and  placed
in deserter status for over 17 years.  After careful  consideration
of the documentation submitted in support of his appeal, it appears
that  he  has  been  a  productive  member  of  society  since  his
discharge.  Nevertheless, in view of the  overall  quality  of  his
service during the period under review and the seriousness  of  the
misconduct that resulted in his undesirable discharge, we  are  not
persuaded that an upgrade of the characterization of his  discharge
to  fully  honorable  is  warranted  on  the  basis  of   clemency.
Accordingly, his request is not favorably considered.

___________________________________________________________________




THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of 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 AFBCMR Docket  Number
BC-2003-01494 in Executive Session on 6  October  2003,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Ms. Marilyn Thomas, Vice Chair
      Ms. Barbara R. Murray, Member
      Ms. Ann-Cecile McDermott, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 11 May 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 2 Jun 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Jun 03.




                                   MARILYN THOMAS
                                   Vice Chair