RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-00762
            INDEX CODE:  110.02
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  4 JUNE 2006

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to honorable or general.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

During his time of  service,  the  Air  Force  did  not  have  programs  for
alcoholism.  He is now a productive citizen and Christian.

In support of the application, the applicant submits a  character  reference
letter  from  his  pastor.   The  applicant's  complete   submission,   with
attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 25 June 1951, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the  age
of 18 in the grade of private for a period of 4 years.  He was  subsequently
promoted to the grade private first class and was demoted to  the  grade  of
private on 8 March 1952 (converted to the rank of airman basic  on  1  April
1952).

The following is a  resume  of  the  applicant’s  character  and  efficiency
ratings:

      CHARACTER  EFFICIENCY

 7 Aug 1951 Excellent  Excellent
16 Aug 1951 Unknown    Unknown
 8 Nov 1951 Excellent  Excellent
17 Jan 1952 Poor Unsatisfactory
19 May 1952 Poor Unsatisfactory

On 6 February 1952, the applicant was  tried  and  convicted  by  a  special
court-martial  for  being  absent  without  proper  authority  (AWOL)   from
4 December 1951 until on or about 9 January 1952.   For  this  incident,  he
was confined at hard labor for two months, forfeited $50.00 for two  months,
and was reduced to the grade of private.

On 19 August 1952, the applicant was convicted by  a  special  court-martial
for being AWOL from 2 June 1952 until on or about 2 August 1952.   For  this
incident, he was confined at hard labor for three months and sentenced to  a
bad conduct discharge.  In a legal review of the record of trial,  dated  12
September 1952, a Staff Judge Advocate reviewed  the  special  court-martial
record, and found it legally sufficient to sustain the  findings  of  guilty
and the sentence.  On 24 September 1952, having found the approved  findings
of guilty and sentence correct in law and fact,  and  having  determined  on
the basis of the entire record that they should be approved,  the  Board  of
Review  affirmed  the  same.   On  20 November  1952,  the   applicant   was
discharged with a bad conduct discharge in the grade of  airman  basic.   He
was credited with 5 months and 26 days of active duty service with 330  days
lost due to AWOL and confinement.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of  Investigation  (FBI)
provided a copy of an  investigative  report  pertaining  to  the  applicant
(Identification Record No. 443948B), which is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states based  on  the  documentation
on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was  consistent  with
procedural and substantive requirements of  the  discharge  regulation,  and
the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge  authority.   DPPRS
notes the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify  any  errors  or
injustices that occurred in the discharge processing,  nor  did  he  provide
any facts warranting a change  to  his  character  of  service.   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  for
review and comment on 15 April 2005.  On  4  May  2005,  the  applicant  was
invited   to   submit   information   pertaining   to    his    post-service
accomplishments.   On  19  May  2005,  a  copy  of  the  Federal  Bureau  of
Investigations (FBI) report was forwarded  to  the  applicant.  As  of  this
date, this office has received no response to any  of  the  before-mentioned
correspondence (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 an error or  injustice.   The  applicant’s  discharge  had  its
basis in his trial and conviction by  a  court-martial.   We  have  seen  no
evidence by the applicant warranting correction of the actions taken by  the
court-martial reviewing authorities.  Additionally, the  applicant  has  not
provided  evidence   pertaining   to   his   post-service   activities   and
accomplishments to support possible favorable consideration of  his  request
based on clemency.  In  our  estimation,  the  statement  by  his  minister,
alone, is not sufficient to warrant favorable consideration of  his  request
on this basis.  Should applicant provide statements from  community  leaders
and acquaintances attesting to his good character and reputation  and  other
evidence of successful post-service rehabilitation since his separation  or,
subsequent to 1972 (his last involvement with  law  enforcement  officials),
we would be willing to reconsider his  request.   In  the  absence  of  such
evidence, we have no basis on which to favorably consider this application.

_________________________________________________________________

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 8 September 2005 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Michael J. Novel, Panel Chair
      Mr. Terry L. Scott, Member
      Ms. Cheryl V. Jacobson, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-2005-00762:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 25 Feb 2005, with atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 11 Apr 2005.

      Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Apr 2005 and
                  Letters, AFBCMR, dated 4 and 19 May 2006.
      Exhibit E.  FBI Report.




                                   MICHAEL J. NOVEL
                                   Panel Chair