RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-03714
                                        INDEX CODE:  110.00

                                        COUNSEL:  None

                                        HEARING DESIRED:  No

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  9 JUN 07

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He is sorry about taking the five dollars from a fellow servicemember.
 He was the  only  one  of  the  four  individuals  that  received  an
undesirable discharge.  He states three months in the stockade and the
stigma of an undesirable discharge is a lot of punishment.

Applicant's complete submission,  with  attachments,  is  attached  at
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 10 August 1955, the applicant enlisted in  the  Regular  Air  Force
(RegAF) as an airman basic (AB) for period of four years.

The applicant’s DD Form 214,  Armed  Forces  of  the  United  States
Report  of  Transfer  or  Discharge  reflects  the   applicant   was
discharged on 31 October 1958, in the grade  of  AB  with  an  under
other  than  honorable  conditions   (undesirable)   discharge,   in
accordance with Air Force Regulation 39-17 for unfitness.  He served
a total of 2 years, 11 months and 27 days of active service, with 85
days of lost time.

Applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) in
5 February  1979  to  have  his  undesirable  discharge  upgraded  to
honorable.   The  applicant’s  complete  military  records  were  not
available for the AFDRB  to  review.   It  was  determined  that  the
applicant’s records were either lost or destroyed and
could not be reconstructed.  The AFDRB reviewed the available records
and found no factors that indicated  the  applicant’s  discharge  was
improper or inequitable.  They concluded  the  applicant’s  discharge
was consistent with the procedural substantive  requirements  of  the
discharge regulation and was  within  the  sound  discretion  of  the
discharge authority.  They further determined there was  no  evidence
to support the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of  Investigation,
Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report which  is  attached
at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS states they are unable to determine the  propriety  of  the
discharge based on  the  lack  of  documentation  in  the  applicant’s
military records.  Furthermore, the applicant has  not  submitted  any
evidence nor identified any errors or injustices that occurred in  the
processing of his discharge.  They defer to the Board to determine  if
the applicant should be granted relief based on the limited supporting
documentation in his record (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and requests  clemency
in having his undesirable discharge upgraded to general (Exhibit F).

On 23 January 2006, the Board staff requested  the  applicant  provide
documentation  concerning  his  activities  since   leaving   military
service.  As of this date, the applicant has  not  responded  (Exhibit
G).

On 8 February 2006, the Board staff forwarded the applicant a copy  of
the FBI report for his review and  response.   As  of  this  date,  no
response has been received from the applicant (Exhibit H).

_________________________________________________________________

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 an injustice  to  warrant  upgrading  the
applicant’s discharge.  We took notice  of  the  applicant's  complete
submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we  agree  with
the opinion  and  recommendation  of  the  Air  Force  and  adopt  its
rationale as the basis for our decision that the applicant has  failed
to sustain his burden that he has  suffered  either  an  error  or  an
injustice.  The applicant’s complete records are  missing;  therefore,
it  cannot  be  determined  what  were  the  exact  reasons  for   the
applicant’s discharge.  The Board notes that the applicant’s  DD  Form
214 reflects he had 85 days of lost time.  It is  further  noted  that
the AFDRB reviewed the available records and determined there  was  no
documentation to indicate  that  the  processing  of  the  applicant’s
discharge was improper or inequitable.  Further, they  concluded  that
his  discharge  was  consistent  with   procedural   and   substantive
requirements of the discharge regulation  and  was  within  the  sound
discretion of  the  discharge  authority.   Therefore,  based  on  the
presumption of regularity in the conduct  of  government  affairs  and
without evidence to the contrary, we must assume that the  applicant’s
separation was proper and in compliance with  appropriate  directives.
Although the applicant  has  requested  clemency,  he  has  failed  to
respond to a request to provide documentation regarding  the  complete
circumstances pertaining to his military service and discharge and any
post-service accomplishments  and  activities.   However,  should  the
applicant provide such documentation, this Board would be  willing  to
review the materials for possible reconsideration of his request based
on clemency.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to  the  contrary,
we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in
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-
2005-03714 in Executive Session on 7 March 2006, under the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. James W. Russell III, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Barbara R. Murray, Member
                 Ms. Kathleen R. O’Sullivan, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket  Number
BC-2005-03714 was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 Nov 05, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. AFDRB Brief, dated 18 Dec 79/.
      Exhibit C. FBI Report.
      Exhibit D. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 16 Dec 05.
      Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Dec 05.
      Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant’s Response, undated.
      Exhibit G. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 23 Jan 06, w/atch.
      Exhibit H. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 8 Feb 06, w/atch.




                                        JAMES W. RUSSELL III
                                        Panel Chair