RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-01109
      INDEX CODE:  110.00

      COUNSEL:  NONE

      HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE:  3 AUGUST 2006

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  under  other  than  honorable  (undesirable)  conditions  discharge  be
upgraded to honorable.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His punishment was unusually  harsh  and  prejudicial.   He  was  undergoing
extreme marital problems.

In support of his application, the applicant submits copies of  post-service
civilian certificates, plaques and awards, a copy of his  summarized  Record
of Trial, and a  copy  of  his  Air  Force  Discharge  Review  (AFDRB)  case
summary.  The applicant’s  complete  submission,  with  attachments,  is  at
Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 23 September 1952, the applicant enlisted in the  Regular  Air  Force  at
the age of 18 in the grade of airman basic for a period of 4 years.  He  was
progressively promoted to the grade of airman first  class  (E-4)  effective
and with a date of rank of 1 December 1954.

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

      CHARACTER  EFFICIENCY

11 December 1952 Excellent   Excellent
29 May 1953 Excellent  Excellent
15 July 1953     Excellent   Excellent
11 September 1953      Unknown    Unknown
14 December 1953 Excellent   Excellent
24 April 1954    Excellent   Excellent
25 June 1955     Very Good   Excellent

In an Airman Performance Report for the  period  12  September  1955  to  30
April 1956, he was recommended for promotion “along  with  other  airman  of
equal service and experience.”

On 17 April 1957, he received an Article 15  for  making  a  false  official
statement.  For this incident, he was given an Article  15  and  reduced  to
the grade of airman second class (E-3).

On 13 May 1957,  he  was  convicted  by  a  summary  court-martial  for  the
offenses of failing to obey  an  order  to  be  physically  present  in  the
squadron barracks on 29 April 1957, failure to repair on  2  May  1957,  and
making a false statement  on  3  May  1957.   For  these  offenses,  he  was
sentenced to reduction to the grade of airman basic, 30 days of hard  labor,
and forfeiture $25.00.

On 3 July 1957, he was  convicted  by  a  special  court-martial  for  being
absent without leave  from  8-24  June  1957.   For  this  offense,  he  was
sentenced to 3 month’s confinement, and forfeited $44.00  per  month  for  3
months.

On 1 October 1957, he removed and transported a  stolen  forty-five  caliber
automatic pistol from a wall locker belonging to another airman.   For  this
incident, he  was  tried  and  convicted  by  a  summary  court-martial  and
sentenced to be confined to hard labor for 26 days, and to forfeit $50.00.

On 25 October 1957, the applicant’s commanding officer submitted  a  Request
for Board Action under provisions of AFR 39-17 to determine whether  or  not
the applicant should be discharged from the service prior to the  expiration
of his term of enlistment because of unfitness.

The applicant was  advised  of  his  rights  under  AFR  39-17,  waived  his
entitlement to appear before a board of officers,  and  requested  discharge
without benefit of board procedures.  In a legal  review  of  the  discharge
case file, the Assistant Staff Judge Advocate  recommended  the  applicant’s
request for discharge  be  accepted  and  that  he  be  discharged  with  an
undesirable discharge.

On 13 November 1957, the discharge  authority  approved  the  recommendation
and  directed  that  the  applicant  be  discharged  from  the  service  and
furnished an Undesirable Discharge certificate.

On  15  November  1957,  the  applicant  was  discharged  under  other  than
honorable conditions.  He had served 4 years 8 months and 25 days on  active
duty.  He had 151 days of  lost  time  due  to  absence  without  leave  and
confinement.

On 28 December 1979, the applicant  submitted  an  application  to  the  Air
Force Discharge Review Board (AFRDB) requesting  his  undesirable  discharge
be upgraded to honorable.  The AFRDB determined that a change  to  the  type
or nature of his discharge was not warranted.  The  AFDRB  Examiner’s  brief
is at Exhibit B.

In response to the Board’s request, the FBI indicated they  were  unable  to
identify an arrest record pertaining  to  the  applicant  on  the  basis  of
information furnished (Exhibit D).

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ  AFPC/DPPRS  recommends  denial.   DPPRS  indicates  the  discharge   was
consistent  with  the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements   of   the
discharge regulation,  and  was  within  the  discretion  of  the  discharge
authority.   Additionally,  the  applicant  did  not  submit  any  evidence,
identify  any  errors  or  injustices  that  occurred   in   the   discharge
processing, or provide any facts warranting a change  to  his  character  of
service.

HQ AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In response to a request for post-service  information,  dated  4 May  2005,
the applicant provided three (3)  reference  letters  from  his  pastor  and
family members (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  error  or  injustice.   We  find  no  impropriety  in  the
characterization of applicant's discharge.  It appears  that  responsible
officials applied appropriate standards in effecting the separation,  and
we do not  find  persuasive  evidence  that  pertinent  regulations  were
violated or that applicant was not  afforded  all  the  rights  to  which
entitled at the time of discharge.   We  conclude,  therefore,  that  the
discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of  the  discharge
was appropriate to the existing circumstances. Although the applicant has
provided some information concerning  post-service  activities,  we  find
this information insufficient to warrant approval of the requested relief
based on the limited quality and quantity, especially in view of the fact
that it has been approximately 48 years since his separation.  Should  he
provide statements from community leaders and acquaintances attesting  to
his good character and reputation, and other evidence of successful post-
service rehabilitation we would be willing to reconsider this case  based
on the new evidence.  We cannot, however, recommend approval based on the
current evidence of record.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate
the existence of an error or injustice 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 17 November 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. James W. Russell III, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Kathleen B. O’Sullivan, Member
                 Ms. LeLoy W. Cottrell, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-2005-01109:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 March 05, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 15 Apr 05;
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Apr 05; and,
            Letter, AFBCMR, dated 4 May 05 w/atch.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 17 May 05 w/atchs.




                                   JAMES W. RUSSELL III
                                   Panel Chair