RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-03647
                                       INDEX CODE:  110.02
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX                  COUNSEL: NONE

      XXXXXXXXXX                        HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  28 June 2007


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He has been guilty for 49 years for something he could  not  help.   He  had
turned into an alcoholic.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 10 March 1955, the applicant enlisted in the Regular  Air  Force  at  the
age of 19 in the grade of airman basic (E-1) for a  period  of  four  years.
The applicant was progressively promoted  to  the  grade  of  airman  second
class (E-3) with a date of rank of 1 September 1956.  He was  trained  as  a
vehicle operator.

On 29 April 1955, the applicant was found guilty  by  special  court-martial
for two specifications of making himself absent  without  proper  authority.
He received punishment consisting of reduction in  grade  to  airman  basic,
confinement at hard labor for three months, and forfeiture of $55 per  month
for three months.

On 18 September 1956,  the  applicant  was  convicted  by  civil  court  for
reckless driving.  On 19 October 1956, the applicant’s  pass  privilege  was
removed for seven days for reporting late for duty.
On 22 July 1957, the applicant received an Article 15 for leaving  the  base
without proper authority and for being drunk  and  disorderly  in  a  public
place.  On 1 August 1957, he received an Article 15 for failure  to  obey  a
lawful order and failure to go  to  his  appointed  place  of  duty.   As  a
result, he was reduced to the grade of airman basic.  On 5 August 1957,  his
pass privilege was removed for two  weeks,  overnight  pass  privileges  was
removed indefinitely and his base driving privileges were removed  based  on
a private motor vehicle accident.  The same day, his  commander  warned  the
applicant that improvement in his  conduct  was  necessary  to  avoid  being
eliminated from the  service  for  unfitness.   On  5  September  1957,  the
applicant  received  two  weeks  restriction  for  being  incapacitated  for
overindulgence  in  alcoholic  beverages  and  for  failure  to  go  to  his
appointed place of duty.

On 19 September 1957, his commander requested the applicant appear before  a
board  of  officers  to  determine  whether  he  would  be  discharged   for
unfitness.  The applicant waived his entitlement to appear before the  board
and requested discharge without benefit of board proceedings.

Following the Staff Judge Advocate’s  finding  that  the  file  was  legally
sufficient, the discharge authority accepted  the  applicant’s  request  for
discharge and directed he be discharged under the provisions  of  Air  Force
Regulation 39-17 with an undesirable discharge.

The applicant was discharged effective 1 November 1957 with an  under  other
than honorable conditions discharge  He had served 2 years, 4 months and  13
days of active duty.  His time lost was 101 days.

Pursuant to the  Board’s  request,  the  Federal  Bureau  of  Investigation,
Clarksburg, WV, provided a copy of an  Investigation  Report  pertaining  to
the applicant, which is at Exhibit H.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states the  applicant’s  discharge  was
consistent  with  the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements   of   the
discharge regulation in effect at that time and, was within  the  discretion
of the discharge authority.  The applicant did not submit  any  evidence  or
identify  any  errors  or  injustices  that  occurred   in   the   discharge
processing.  It is DPPRS’s opinion that the applicant did  not  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:

Copies of the Air Force evaluation and the FBI report  were  forwarded  to
the applicant on 23 December 2005 and  17  January  2006  for  review  and
comment (Exhibits D and H).  He responded that these are not  his  records
(Exhibit E).  The applicant  was  also  given  an  opportunity  to  submit
information concerning  his  post-service  activities  (Exhibit  F).   The
applicant responded that he cannot take advantage of this opportunity  due
to the loss of his eyesight.  He further states that until the loss of his
eyesight, he owned a transmission shop.

The applicant’s response is at Exhibit G.

_________________________________________________________________

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 it 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 March 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
      Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member
      Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member


The following documentary evidence was considered for AFBCMR  Docket  Number
BC-2005-03647:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 25 Nov 05.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 15 Dec 05.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Dec 05.
      Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Letter, undated.
      Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 17 Jan 06, w/atch.
      Exhibit G.  Applicant’s Letter, undated, w/atchs.
      Exhibit H.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 28 Feb 06, w/FBI Report.




                                  RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                                   Panel Chair