RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-01086
            INDEX CODE:  110.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  1 OCT 06


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Since his separation from the service, he has maintained  a  life  of  good
citizenship and service in his community,  schools,  and  church.   He  has
raised three children.  He further states he was really young at that time.
 He would like an honorable  discharge  to  hang  next  to  his  son’s  and
father’s honorable discharge.

The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 6 July 1962, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force (RegAF)  as
an airman basic (AB)  for  a  period  of  four  years.   He  was  honorably
discharged on 2 December 1965.  He reenlisted in RegAF on 3  December  1965
for a period of four years.

On 22 November 1966, the applicant was notified of  his  group  commander's
intent to recommend  him  for  discharge  for  frequent  involvement  of  a
discreditable nature with  civil  or  military  authorities  and  financial
irresponsibility.  In the commander’s  recommendation  for  discharge,  the
following information was cited regarding the  applicant’s  conduct  during
both of his enlistments:

      a.    On 13 September 1965, the  applicant,  an  airman  first  class
(A1C), received an Article 15 for failure  to  obey  a  lawful  order.   He
received 30 days of extra duty.

      b.    On 4 May 1966, the applicant received an Article 15 for failure
to repair and was demoted in rank from A1C to airman second class (A2C) and
received 60 days of restriction.

      c.    On 31 May 1966,  the  applicant  received  an  Article  15  for
breaking restriction and was demoted in rank from A2C to airman third class
(A3C) and ordered into 30 days’ correctional custody.

Additionally:

      d.    On 12  February  1965,  the  applicant  received  a  Letter  of
Indebtedness from Bank of America.

      e.    On 7 July 1965, the applicant received a Letter of Indebtedness
from Seaboard Finance.

       f.     On  20  July  1965,  the  applicant  received  a  Letter   of
Indebtedness from Swings Apparel.

       g.     On  6  August  1965,  the  applicant  received  a  Letter  of
Indebtedness from Swings Apparel.

      h.    On 17 November 1965, AF Form 49, Incident Report was  initiated
due the applicant failure to comply with regulations  (Sale  of  Concession
vehicle to a nonenlisted person and Failure to register vehicle).

      i.    On 22 November 1965,  a  check  was  returned  for  insufficient
funds.

      j.    On 6 October 1966, the  applicant  received  a  memorandum  for
record (MOR) on Standards of Conduct for Air Policeman.

      k.    On  27  October  1966,  the  applicant  received  a  Letter  of
Indebtedness from A.J.A. Taylor & Co Ltd.

On 28 December 1966, the group commander advised applicant of his right  to
consult legal counsel; present his  case  to  an  administrative  discharge
board;  be  represented  by  legal  counsel  at  a  board  hearing;  submit
statements in his own behalf in addition to,  or  in  lieu  of,  the  board
hearing; or waive the above rights after consulting with counsel.

On 28 December 1966, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification
letter and that military counsel was made  available  to  assist  him;  and
after consulting with counsel, the applicant invoked his right to submit  a
statement and waived his right to a board hearing.

A legal review was conducted on 29 December 1966 in which the  group  staff
judge advocate (SJA) recommended the applicant be discharged with a general
discharge with no probation and rehabilitation.  The SJA also  cited  a  12
December 1966 incident (occurred after  the  discharge  recommendation)  in
which the applicant was convicted in civil court for driving an  automobile
without insurance and for which he was punished with  a  $56.00  fine.   In
addition, the SJA cited an outstanding electricity bill which had been  the
subject of several telephone calls.   The  SJA  also  explained  the  delay
between the notice to the applicant and his waiver of a board  hearing  was
due to numerous counseling sessions between the applicant and his counsel.

Initially, the case was returned without action by the numbered  Air  Force
SJA because the applicant’s counsel asserted two defects in the case.   The
applicant and his counsel were advised that the errors were  without  merit
and that the discharge authority  would  consider  the  applicant’s  entire
service  record  in  determining  whether  he  should  be  retained.    The
applicant would again be  afforded  the  opportunity  to  request  a  board
hearing or to submit a new written waiver.

On 13 January 1967, the group SJA advised the applicant’s  counsel  of  the
above information.

On 20 January 1967 applicant acknowledged receipt of the  notification  and
again waived his  right  to  board  hearing  and  submitted  an  additional
statement.

On 26 January 1967, the discharge  authority  approved  the  discharge  and
directed the applicant be discharged with  an  under  honorable  conditions
(general) discharge.  The discharge authority stated the applicant had been
considered for the probation and rehabilitation program but in view of  his
record, he was not considered a fit subject.

The applicant was discharged on 15 February 1967, in the grade of A3C  with
an under honorable conditions (general) discharge, in accordance  with  AFM
39-12, Separation for Unsuitability, Misconduct,  Resignation,  or  Request
for  Discharge  for  the  Good  of  the  Service  and  Procedures  for  the
Rehabilitation Program (frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with
civil or military authorities).  He served 4 years, 2 months and 10 days of
active service.

Pursuant to the Board’s  request,  the  Federal  Bureau  of  investigation,
Washington, D.C., indicated on the basis of the data  furnished  they  were
unable to locate an arrest record (Exhibit C).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS  states  the  applicant  has  not  submitted  any  evidence  nor
identified any errors or injustices that occurred in the processing of  his
discharge.  Based upon the documentation  in  the  applicant's  file,  they
believe his discharge was consistent with the  procedural  and  substantive
requirements  of  the  discharge  regulations  of  that  time.   Also,  the
discharge was within the  sound  discretion  of  the  discharge  authority.
Also, he did not provide any facts to warrant an upgrade of his  discharge.
Based  on  the  information  and  evidence  provided  they  recommend   the
applicant's request be denied (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  the  applicant  on  15
April 2005, for review and response.  As of this date, no response has been
received by this office.

On  26  April  2005,  the  Board  staff  requested  the  applicant  provide
documentation regarding his activities since leaving military service.   As
of this date, the applicant has not responded (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.  Sufficient relevant evidence has  been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or an injustice.  After  a  thorough  review  of  the
evidence of record  we  see  no  evidence  to  show  that  the  applicant’s
discharge was erroneous or  unjust.   However,  we  recognize  the  adverse
impact of the discharge the applicant received; and while it may have  been
appropriate at the time, we believe  it  would  be  an  injustice  for  the
applicant to continue to suffer from its effects.  In consideration of  the
applicant’s apparent immaturity at the time of his enlistment, and with  no
apparent  evidence  that  he  has  had  any  subsequent  involvement  of  a
derogatory nature since his separation from the Air Force, we believe  that
corrective action is appropriate on the basis of clemency.  Accordingly, we
recommend that his records be corrected to the extent indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force  relating
to APPLICANT, be corrected to  show  that  on  15  February  1967,  he  was
honorably discharged and furnished an Honorable Discharge certificate.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2005-
01086 in Executive Session on 8 June 2005 under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:

                 Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Dorothy P. Loeb, Member
                 Mr. Clarence D. Long III, Member

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

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Mar 05, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  FBI Report.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 11 Apr 05.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Apr 05.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 26 Apr 05, w/atch.




                                        MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
                 Panel Chair






AFBCMR BC-2004-01086





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      , be corrected to show that on 15 February 1967, he was
honorably discharged and furnished an Honorable Discharge certificate.




                             JOE G. LINEBERGER
                             Director
                             Air Force Review Boards Agency