RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

      IN THE MATTER OF:            DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-03677
            INDEX CODE: 110.00
      XXXXXXX                     COUNSEL:  NONE

                                   HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 3 JUNE 2008

______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  general  under  honorable  conditions  discharge  be  upgraded  to  an
honorable discharge.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He believes enough time has passed to request his discharge be upgraded  to
an honorable discharge.  He states at the time he was very young  and  fell
into the snare of a weird family, a weird lady and a phony shotgun wedding.


In support of his request the applicants submits a personal letter.

His complete submission with attachments is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Air Force on 10 July 1957 in the grade  of  airman
basic.  On 19 December 1960, he was notified by his commander  that  he  was
recommending he be discharged from the Air Force  under  the  provisions  of
AFR 39-16, Discharge for Unsuitability.    The  specific  reasons  for  this
action were on 16 November 1960,  he  was  convicted  by  a  summary  court-
martial  for  being  absent  without  leave  (AWOL)  for  eight   days;   on
14 December 1960, he was diagnosed with a character and  behavior  disorder,
inadequate personality,  manifested  by  poor  judgment,  ineptness,  social
incompatibility, and difficulty with authority figures; also on 14  December
1960, he failed to repair for duty; between 12  and  15  December  1960,  he
reported late for work on  four  occasions;  on  22  December  1960  he  was
reported absent from a scheduled detail.  He was advised of  his  rights  in
this  matter.   On  4  January  1960,  he  acknowledged   receipt   of   the
notification and declined to submit a statement  in  his  own  behalf.   The
discharge authority approved the separation and directed  he  be  discharged
with a general discharge.  On 6 January 1961, he  was  discharged  from  the
Air Force in the grade of airman basic.  He served three years, five  months
and six days on active duty.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the FBI indicated that on  the  basis  on
the data furnished, they were unable to locate an arrest record.  (Exhibit
C).

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS  recommends  denial.   DPPRS  states  that  the  discharge   was
consistent  with  the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements  of   the
discharge regulation.  In addition, the  discharge  was  within  the  sound
discretion of the discharge authority.  He did not submit any new  evidence
or identify any  errors  or  injustices  that  occurred  in  his  discharge
processing.  The applicant did not provide any facts warranting a change to
his general discharge.

The complete DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicants states he was never late for  work  and  believes  his  troubles
started after this lady he was  seeing  became  pregnant  one  month  after
meeting her.  They eventually married and received an assignment to Keesler
AFB (KAFB) Mississippi where he states he did not have the  money  to  move
his family from Georgia.  He states his wife could not travel much  due  to
the pregnancy; as a result, it took several days to arrive at  KAFB.   Once
he arrived at KAFB he was assigned to the sanitation department instead  of
the post office and discovered he  was  going  to  be  court-martialed  and
subsequently discharged.  He states he was told he would be allowed to keep
his rank but would have to spend time in the stockade.  Afterwards, he  was
discharged.  He then discovered his wife wanted to be married to a military
man.  He indicated he would wait until the child  was  born;  however,  his
wife informed him the child  was  not  his.   He  has  since  divorced  and
currently completing paralegal studies and plans to attend law school.   He
is a senior vice president and has worked in banking for  many  years.   In
addition he is a religion teacher,  very  active  in  his  church  and  has
completed the highest rank obtainable in the Knights of Columbus.  His  son
is a member of the 82ND Airborne Unit and has served a tour in  Afghanistan
and two tours in Iraq.

His complete response is at Exhibit F.

________________________________________________________________

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 injustice.   After  careful  consideration  of  the
available evidence, we found no indication that the actions taken to  affect
his discharge and characterization of his service  were  improper,  contrary
to the provisions of the governing regulations in effect  at  the  time,  or
based on factors other than his own misconduct.  Therefore,  we  agree  with
the  opinion  and  recommendation  of  the  Air  Force  office  of   primary
responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion  that
the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.

________________________________________________________________

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-2006-
03677 in Executive Session on 8 February 2007, under the provisions  of  AFI
36-2603:

                 Ms. Kathy L. Boockholdt, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Teri G. Spoutz, Member
                 Mr. Charlie E. Williams Jr., Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 21 November 2006, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  FBI Report, dated 4 January 2007.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 14 December 2006.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 January 2007.




                                   KATHY L. BOOCKHOLDT
                                             Panel Chair
                         DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
                                WASHINGTON DC



[pic]

Office of the Assistant Secretary


AFBCMR
1535 Command Drive EE Wing 3rd Floor
Andrews AFB, MD 20762-7002

XXXXXXX
XXXXXXX
XXXXXXX

XXXXXXX

      Reference your application, AFBCMR BC-2006-03677 submitted under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603 (Section 1552, 10 USC).

      After careful consideration of your application and military records,
the Board determined that the evidence you presented did not demonstrate
the existence of material error or injustice.  Accordingly, the Board
denied your application.

      You have the right to submit newly discovered relevant evidence for
consideration by the Board.  In the absence of such additional evidence, a
further review of your application is not possible.

      BY DIRECTION OF THE PANEL CHAIR





                                                       GREGORY E.
JOHNSON
                                                             Chief
Examiner
                                                 Air Force Board
for Correction
                                                       of Military
Records

Attachment:
Record of Board Proceedings