RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-04042
		INDEX CODE:  110.02
	XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  UNKNOWN

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was young with a limited education and inexperienced when he 
enlisted in the military in 1952.  His supervisors and commander 
did not make him aware, nor did he understand, there were other 
options available to him before he went absent without leave 
(AWOL) to take care of his mother.  His mother was a single 
parent with four minor children at home when he left to join the 
military to help out his family financially.  They had no one 
else to rely on to help them out.  He would have liked to stay 
in the military; however, he felt he had no choice given his 
family situation.  He has had a clean life since his discharge 
and regrets the many mistakes he made.  

In support of his request, the applicant provided a personal 
statement; a statement of no criminal records from the clerk of 
Court, Iberia Parish, LA; three character references; and a copy 
of his DD Form 214, Report of Separation from the Armed Forces 
of the United States.  

The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________
_

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 24 July 1952, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force 
at the age of 17 in the grade of airman basic (E-1) for a period 
of four years.  He was promoted to the grade of airman third 
class (E-2) effective 15 September 1952.  

Special Court Martial Order Number 31, dated 12 May 1954, 
indicates the applicant was tried for making himself absent from 
his organization on or about 11 December 1953, without proper 
authority, and remaining absent until on or about 28 April 1954.  
The applicant pled guilty to the charge and was subsequently 
found guilty by the court.  The court sentenced the applicant to 
confinement at hard labor for six months, forfeiture of $28 per 
month for a like period, and reduction in grade to airman basic.  

Special Court Martial Order Number 61, dated 16 October 1954, 
indicates the applicant was tried for making himself absent from 
his organization on or about 31 August 1954, without proper 
authority, and remaining absent until on or about 28 September 
1954.  The applicant pled guilty to the charge and was 
subsequently found guilty by the court.  The court sentenced the 
applicant to confinement at hard labor for 2 months and 15 days, 
and forfeiture of $28 per month for a like period.  

On 6 December 1954, his commander initiated action against the 
applicant for discharge under AFR 39-17 for unfitness.  The 
applicant acknowledged receipt of the commander’s intent, 
requested discharge without benefit of board proceedings, and 
indicated he understood his separation, if approved, may be 
characterized as under conditions other than honorable and may 
result in an undesirable discharge.  On 17 January 1955, 
following the Judge Advocate’s finding that the case was legally 
sufficient, the discharge authority approved the applicant’s 
discharge under the provision of AFR 39-17 and directed he be 
discharged with an undesirable discharge.  

On 21 January 1955, the applicant was released from active duty 
with an undesirable discharge under the provisions of AFR 39-10, 
paragraph 15e(2) and AFR 39-17, paragraph 3a(3).  He was 
credited with 1 year, 5 months and 13 days of active duty with 
380 days lost time.  

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation, Clarksburg, WV, indicated that on the basis of 
the data furnished, they were unable to locate an arrest record 
pertaining to the applicant (Exhibit C).

On 19 April 2007, the applicant was given the opportunity to 
submit comments about his post service activities (Exhibit D).  
As of this date, this office has received no response.  

________________________________________________________________
_

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, we find no evidence of an error or injustice 
that occurred in the discharge processing.  Based on the 
available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was 
consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge 
regulation and within the commander's discretionary authority.  
The applicant has provided no evidence which would lead us to 
believe the characterization of the service was contrary to the 
provisions of the governing regulation, unduly harsh, or 
disproportionate to the offenses committed.  We considered 
upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not 
find the evidence presented is sufficient to compel us to 
recommend granting the relief sought on that basis.  Therefore, 
in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis 
upon which to recommend granting the relief sought.

________________________________________________________________

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 20 March 2008, under the provisions of 
AFI 36-2603:

			XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair
			XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, Member
			XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection 
with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2007-04042:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 Dec 07, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  FBI Response, dated 18 Jan 08.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 30 Jan 08, w/atch.
	Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Letter, not dated, w/atchs.




						XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
						Panel Chair