RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03547
            INDEX CODE:  110.02
            COUNSEL:  None
            HEARING DESIRED:  YES


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: May 20, 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  undesirable  discharge  be  upgraded  to  a  general  (under  honorable
conditions)  discharge  based  on  clemency  and  his  service   number   be
corrected.

His DD 214, Report of  Separation  from  the  Armed  Forces  of  the  United
States, be corrected to reflect the 3-months  of  service  he  performed  in
Fort Churchill, Manitoba, Canada, and reflect his general education  diploma
(GED).
  _________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was awarded his GED at Donald AFB, SC, in late 1952 or early 1953.

He has been a good upstanding citizen  and  led  a  productive,  respectable
life since his discharge and acknowledges the mistake he made as  a  19-year
old.

In support of his request, the applicant provided a  copy  of  his  DD  Form
214, copies of his military  records,  a  North  Carolina  Criminal  Records
Search, birth certificates of his children, character statements,  a  credit
report, various certificates,  published  articles,  a  statement  from  his
wife, and his own personal testimony.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Air Force on 9 Sep 53 and served for a  period
of 1 year, 8 months and 22 days.

On 16 Feb 55, the applicant and two other individuals  broke  into  the  Day
Hardware Company and were later charged with housebreaking and larceny.

The applicant was sentenced on 6 Jun 55 to  2  years  on  each  charge.  His
sentence was to be served concurrently in Pickens County, SC.

On 10 Jun 55, the applicant’s commander  initiated  discharge  action.   The
discharge authority approved the discharge and directed that  the  applicant
be separated with an undesirable discharge.  He was separated on  5  Jul  55
with an undesirable discharge.

During the applicant’s time of service, education records were annotated  in
pen and ink once the member produced a  copy  of  his  or  her  certificate.
Certificates of education are not  kept  in  the  master  personnel  records
(MPR). There are not annotations or documentation  in  the  applicant’s  MPR
reflecting a GED.

AFPC/DPPRS will take corrective actions to correct the  applicant’s  service
number on his DD 214 upon completion of the case.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  Based on the documentation  on  file  in  the
MPR, the discharge  was  consistent  with  the  procedural  and  substantive
requirements of the discharge regulation.   The  discharge  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.  He provided no  facts  warranting  a  change  to  his
undesirable discharge.

The complete evaluation of AFPC/DPPRS is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPAPP recommends denial.  There is no evidence in the  applicant’s  MPR
to  confirm  any  temporary  duties  (TDYs)  to  Canada  while  assigned  to
Donaldson AFB, SC.

The complete evaluation of AFPC/DPAPP is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In his response, the applicant provided an account  of  his  time  spent  in
Canada and his post-service activities with extracts of his MPR.

He further stated it has been over 50 years and  he  has  led  an  honorable
life, a Christian life, married, had two children, eight grandchildren,  one
great-grandchild, has owned a business for many years, and  has  decided  he
would like to clear his name. He is requesting an upgrade on  the  basis  of
clemency.

The applicant’s complete response is at 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 evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  an  error  or
injustice on the  applicant’s  request  to  amend  his  DD  214  to  reflect
overseas duty in Canada or a general education diploma (GED).

4.  The Board finds 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.
Considered alone, we conclude the  discharge  proceedings  were  proper  and
characterization  of  the  discharge  was  appropriate   to   the   existing
circumstances.

5.  Consideration of this Board, however,  is  not  limited  to  the  events
which precipitated the discharge.  We have  a  Congressional  mandate  which
permits consideration of other factors; e.g.,  applicant's  background,  the
overall   quality   of   service,   and    post-service    activities    and
accomplishments.  Further, we may base our decision  on  matters  of  equity
and clemency rather than simply  on  whether  rules  and  regulations  which
existed at the time were followed.  This is  a  much  broader  consideration
than officials involved in the discharge were permitted,  and  our  decision
in no way discredits the validity of theirs.

6.  Under our broader mandate and after careful  consideration  of  all  the
facts  and  circumstances  of  applicant's  case,  we  are  persuaded   that
applicant has overcome the behavioral traits  which  led  to  the  contested
discharge and has been a productive member of  society.   We  recognize  the
adverse impact of the discharge applicant received; and, while it  may  have
been appropriate at the time, we believe it would be an  injustice  for  the
applicant
to continue to suffer its effects.  Accordingly,  we  find  that  corrective
action is appropriate as a matter of equity and on the basis of clemency.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air  Force  relating
to the APPLICANT  be  corrected  to  show  that  on  5  July  1955,  he  was
discharged  with  service  characterized   as   general   (under   honorable
conditions).

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2006-
03547 in Executive Session on 7 March 2007, under the provisions of AFI  36-
2603:

      Ms. Cathlynn B. Novel, Panel Chair
      Ms. Dee R. Reardon, Member
      Mr. Jeffery R. Shelton, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 Nov 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Military Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  AFPC/DPPRS Letter, dated 12 Jan 07.
    Exhibit D.  AFPC/DPAPP Letter, dated 29 Dec 06.
    Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Rebuttal, dated 5 Feb 07 w/atchs.
    Exhibit F.  SAF/MRBR Letter, dated 26 Jan 07.




                                   CATHLYNN B. NOVEL
                                   Panel Chair








      AFBCMR BC-2006-03547






      MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF


            Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air
      Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority
      of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is
      directed:


            The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
      Force relating to XXXXXX, be corrected to show that on 5 July 1955, he
      was discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable
      conditions).








                                                             JOE G.
      LINEBERGER
                                                             Director
                                                             Air Force
      Review Board Agency