RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02427
            INDEX CODE:  110.02

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His undesirable discharge be upgraded.
___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Prior to his enlistment in the Air Force, he wrote a check  in  the
amount of $95.  The company he worked for went on strike and he did
not  have  sufficient  funds  to  cover  the  check.    After   his
enlistment, civilian authorities arrested  him  and  while  he  was
serving his sentence, he was discharged.

He had previously served a three-year tour with the National  Guard
and attained the rank of staff sergeant and would  have  done  well
had he been able to continue in the Air Force.

He has lived a good life since  his  discharge  in  1954.   He  has
worked and supported  his  family,  been  involved  in  church  and
community activities and believes himself to  be  an  overall  good
citizen of the United States.

In support of his appeal, applicant submitted letters of  character
reference  from  friends,   associates,   co-workers   and   county
officials; a police record from the Warren County Sheriff’s Office,
dated 1 Jul 03, and a certificate of membership  to  the  Free  and
Accepted Masons, dated 8 Jun 03.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Prior to the period of service under review, the  applicant  served
honorably in the US  National  Guard  from  18  Nov  49  until  his
discharge on 29 Apr 52.

On 25 Aug 53, he enlisted in the Air Force for a period of 4  years
in the grade of airman basic.

Applicant was placed in confinement on 28 Oct 53,  pending  Special
Court-Martial  proceedings  for  forgery.   He  escaped  from   the
stockade on 7 Dec 53, and remained absent without leave (AWOL)  for
a period of six  days.   He  was  apprehended  by  Air  Police  and
returned to confinement on 13 Dec 53.  On 14 Dec 53, applicant  was
released to the United States Marshal  for  retention  until  civil
officials arrived to take him into custody.  He was transferred  to
civilian authorities on 21 Dec 53, for  the  purposes  of  awaiting
trial for passing bad checks.

On 27 Mar 54, applicant was tried in a civil court on  the  charges
of passing a bad check.  He pled guilty and was sentenced to  serve
an indeterminate sentence in a Federal Correctional Institution.

On 7 May 54, the  commander  recommended  administrative  discharge
action against the applicant  by  reason  of  conviction  by  civil
court.

On 7 May  54,  the  Asst  Wing  Adjutant  approved  an  undesirable
discharge  and  directed   that   the   applicant   be   issued   a
DD Form 258AF, “Undesirable Discharge Certificate.”  On 20 May  54,
he was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-22, by  reason  of
conviction by civil court and was issued an  undesirable  discharge
certificate.  He was credited with 2 months and 3  days  of  active
duty service during this period (excludes 205 days lost time due to
AWOL and confinement).

On  3  Jun  82,  the  Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Board  (AFDRB)
considered and denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his
discharge to general or honorable.

On 30 Aug 82, a similar appeal was considered  and  denied  by  the
Board (see Record of Proceedings at Exhibit C).

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

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS 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,  nor  did  he
provide  any  facts  warranting  an  upgrade  of   his   discharge.
Accordingly, they recommended his records remain the same  and  his
request be denied.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit E.

___________________________________________________________________


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In the applicant’s response to the  evaluation,  he  explained  the
circumstances surrounding his discharge and his life since  leaving
the service.

Applicant’s complete response is at 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.  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 his separation from the Air Force
was inappropriate.  We find no evidence of error in this  case  and
after  thoroughly  reviewing  the  documentation  that   has   been
submitted in support of applicant's appeal, we do  not  believe  he
has suffered from an injustice.  Therefore, based on the  available
evidence of record, we  find  no  basis  upon  which  to  favorably
consider this application.

4.  Although   the   applicant   did   not   specifically   request
consideration based on clemency, we also find insufficient evidence
to warrant a recommendation that the discharge be upgraded on  that
basis.  We have considered applicant's overall quality of  service,
the events which precipitated the discharge, and available evidence
related  to  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 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-2003-02427  in  Executive  Session  on  5  November   2003   and
4 February 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Panel Chair
                 Mr. James W. Russell III, Member
                 Ms. Leslie E. Abbott, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 16 Jul 03, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Record of Proceedings, undated.
     Exhibit D.  FBI Report of Investigation.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 13 Aug 03.
     Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Aug 03.
     Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 17 Oct 03.
     Exhibit H.  Letter, Applicant, dated 25 Oct 03.





                                   BRENDA L. ROMINE
                                   Panel Chair