RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-03863
                                       INDEX CODE:  110.02
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX                  COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXXXXXX                            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  19 June 2006


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general discharge be upgraded to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was an ignorant 18-year old who suffered racial prejudice because he  was
Hispanic.

The  applicant  provided  no  evidence  in  support  of  his  appeal.    The
applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 25 July 1960, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the  age
of 17 in the grade of airman basic (E-1) for a period  of  four  years.   He
was  trained  as  an  Apprentice   Air   Policeman.    The   applicant   was
progressively promoted to the grade of airman third class (E-2) with a  date
of rank of 20 October 1960.

On 27 March 1961, the applicant was charged with being Absent Without  Leave
(AWOL) from 17 March 1961 to 20 March 1961.   The  applicant  was  tried  by
Summary Court-Martial and pled guilty to the charges of  being  absent  from
his organization without proper authority on or about  17  March  1961,  and
remaining so absent until on or about  21  March  1961.   The  Court-Martial
found the  applicant  guilty  of  the  charges  and  imposed  punishment  of
confinement at hard labor for 21 days, reduction in grade to  airman  basic,
and forfeiture of $25.

Following his confinement, the applicant  was  given  a  three-day  pass  to
prepare his uniforms and equipment for duty and to  visit  his  family.   He
failed to report back to duty from his pass at the time prescribed.

On 21 April 1961, the applicant was  evaluated  by  the  Psychiatric  Clinic
after  attempting  suicide.   The  psychiatric  evaluation  determined   the
applicant to have a character behavior disorder characterized by  immaturity
reaction emotional instability.  The physician’s recommendation was for  the
applicant’s administrative separation from the service under  provisions  of
Air Force Regulation 39-10.

On 3 May 1961, his  commander  notified  the  applicant  of  his  intent  to
discharge the applicant and recommended he be required to appear  before  an
Evaluation Officer to determine  his  eligibility  to  be  retained  in  the
military service.  On 8 May 1961, the  Evaluation  Officer  interviewed  the
applicant and advised him of his rights to submit a rebuttal  or  statements
in his own behalf.  The applicant waived his right to submit either.   On  9
May 1961, the Staff Judge Advocate found the case to be legally  sufficient.
 On 12 May 1961, the Discharge Authority approved and ordered the  applicant
be discharged for unsuitability under the provisions of AFR  39-10,  Section
B, with a General  Discharge  Certificate.   The  applicant  was  discharged
effective  17  May  1961  with  a  general  (under   honorable   conditions)
characterization of service.  He had served nine  months  and  two  days  on
active duty.  He had 22 days’ lost time.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the FBI indicated that on the basis of  the
data furnished, they were unable to locate an arrest  record  pertaining  to
the applicant.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRSP states the applicant’s  discharge  was
consistent  with  the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements   of   the
discharge regulation in affect at that time.   Additionally,  the  discharge
was within the discretion of the discharge  authority.   The  applicant  did
not provide any facts warranting a change  in  his  discharge,  nor  did  he
submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices  that  occurred
in his discharge processing.  The DPPRS 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  14
January 2005, for review and comment within 30  days  (Exhibit  D).   As  of
this date, this office has received no response.  On 2  February  2005,  the
applicant was given the  opportunity  to  submit  comments  about  his  post
service activities.  As of this date, this office has received  no  response
(Exhibit E).

_________________________________________________________________

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.  The applicant  did  not  provide
persuasive evidence showing the  information  in  the  discharge  case  was
erroneous, his substantial rights were violated,  or  that  his  commanders
abused their discretionary authority.  The  characterization  of  discharge
which was issued at the  time  of  the  applicant’s  separation  accurately
reflects the circumstances of  his  separation  and  we  do  not  find  the
characterization of discharge to be in error or unjust.   In  view  of  the
foregoing and in the absence of evidence by the applicant  attesting  to  a
successful post-service adjustment in the years since  his  separation,  we
are not inclined to extend clemency in this case.  Therefore,  we  conclude
that no basis exists upon  which  to  recommend  favorable  action  on  his
request that the characterization of his discharge be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

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 this application in  Executive
Session on 30 June 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Panel Chair
            Mr. Terry L. Scott, Member
            Ms. Kathy L. Boockholdt, Member


The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR  Docket  Number  BC-2004-03863
was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 Dec 04.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 10 Jan 05.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Jan 05.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 2 Feb 05.




                                  LAURENCE M. GRONER
                                                   Panel Chair