RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01966

      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE
      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED: NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 21 Dec 06

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was court-martialed and all facts and testimony were  not  presented  and
ignored by his defense. His  company  commander  who  drew  up  the  charges
against him was in the court appointed jury  pool.  His  appointed  attorney
made it very clear that he neither had the time for a small case  like  his,
to plead guilty, and after three months after discharge an upgrade would  be
automatic.

Upon his discharge from active military service, he  came  home  very  angry
and felt that injustice by the system had rendered him a raw deal.  He  felt
betrayed and  also  contended  that  there  were  indeed  double  standards,
especially when it came to his CO serving in  the  jury  during  his  court-
martial. During his out processing, he was informed by  the  out  processing
NCO that his case was a common one within the military and within the  first
three years after a discharge an automatic upgrade would  be  granted.  This
also was not true, as he later found out. He felt the  need  to  strike  and
lash out but eventually learned his need to forgive and have faith.  He  has
been through numerous trails and tribulations and has found his  Lord  along
the way. He has been able to lead a productive life.  He submits  statements
of support from three people that know him.

In support of his application, the applicant submits a copy of DD Form  214,
Report of Separation from Active Duty, letters of support  from  Saint  Paul
Missionary Baptist Church and coworkers.

Applicant’s complete application, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an  airman  basic  on  19
July 1971 and progressed to the grade of sergeant.

On 13 September 1974, a special court-martial  convicted  the  applicant  of
the following charges: on or about  27  July  1974,  stole  one  Hild  floor
polisher the property of the United States; on  or  about  12  August  1974,
made a claim against the United States for private property he  alleged  had
been lost in the military service, which was totally false  and  fraudulent.
Applicant was sentenced to a bad  conduct  discharge,  confinement  at  hard
labor for two (2) months and reduction to the grade of  airman  basic.   The
sentence was affirmed by Special Court-Martial  Order  Number  1,  dated  30
January 1975. He served 3 years, 3 months and 29 days on active duty.

On 15 October  1984,  the  Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Board  denied  the
applicant’s  request  for  upgrade  of  his  discharge  and  concluded   the
discharge was consistent with the procedural  and  substantive  requirements
of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and that the applicant was  provided
full due process.

Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation  (FBI),
Clarksburg,  WV,  provided  an  investigative  report  pertaining   to   the
applicant (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial.  DPPRS states based on the  documentation  in
the file, the discharge was consistent with the procedural  and  substantive
requirements of the discharge regulation.  Applicant did not submit any  new
evidence  or  identify  any  errors  or  injustices  that  occurred  in  the
discharge proceedings.  He provided no facts warranting an  upgrade  of  the
discharge.

AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 8  July
2005, for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date,  no  response
has been received by this office.

A copy of the FBI report was forwarded to the applicant  on  8 August  2005,
for review and comment within 14 days.  As of this  date,  no  response  has
been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

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  took  notice  of  the  applicant's
complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case.   However,  after
thorough review of the evidence of  record,  it  is  our  opinion  that  the
comments of the Air Force office of primary responsibility are supported  by
the evidence of record.  We find no evidence  of  error  in  this  case  and
after thoroughly reviewing the applicant's submission, we do not believe  he
has suffered from an injustice.  We considered upgrading  his  discharge  on
the basis of clemency; however, due to the serious nature  of  the  offenses
committed, in the  short  period  of  time  in  which  he  served,  and  his
subsequent  misconduct,  we  believe  that  the  characterization   of   his
discharge was proper and in compliance with the appropriate directives.   In
the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find  no  basis  upon
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 AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2005-
01966 in Executive Session on 24 Aug 05, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
      Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Member
      Mr. John B. Hennessey, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Jun 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 6 Jul 05.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Jul 05.
    Exhibit E.  FBI Investigative Report.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 8 Aug 05.




                                   KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
                                   Panel Chair