RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-02110
            INDEX CODE:  110.02

      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  6 JAN 2009


___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He  never  received  an  honorable  discharge,  one  that  properly
reflects his service to his country.  He may not have made the best
military member; however, he tried and is proud of it.

Applicant had medical problems with  diabetes  and  blood  pressure
that he believes added to his moods during his military service,  a
condition which the effects were unknown at the time.  However,  it
still bothers him that he was not able to be the kind of airman  he
knew he could be.

In support of his appeal, applicant submitted a personal  statement
and a certified copy of his DD Form 214, Report of Separation  from
the Armed Forces of the United States, issued on 12 Oct 55.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 10  May  55  in  the
grade of airman basic for a period of four years.  He was  assigned
to his unit on 1 Aug 55.

On 12 Sep 55, under the provisions of AFR 39-17, para 5b, Discharge
of Airmen Because of Unfitness, applicant’s  commander  recommended
he appear before a Board of Officers to determine if he  should  be
discharged from the Air Force for unfitness.  The specific  reasons
for the proposed action were:

            a.  On or about 19 Aug 55, he failed to obey  an  order
to assist with cleaning the squadron area.  He was punished with an
Article  15.   His  punishment  consisted  of  restriction  to  the
squadron area and place of duty for fourteen (14) days….

            b.  On or about 22 Aug 55, he broke restriction  placed
upon him on 19 Aug 55.  For this misconduct, he received Article 15
punishment, consisting of fourteen (14) days of extra duty  not  to
exceed two hours per day.

            c.  On or about 7 Sep 55, he failed to clean  his  room
in  accordance  with  squadron  policy.   He  received  Article  15
punishment, consisting of fourteen (14) days of restriction to  the
squadron area….

             d.  Being  counseled  on  numerous  occasions  by  the
squadron commander, squadron  adjutant,  and  the  first  sergeant.
Considering his complete disregard for military discipline and poor
character, no further  effective  service  was  expected  from  the
member.

On  that  same  date,  applicant  acknowledged   receipt   of   the
administrative discharge  action  and  waived  his  entitlement  to
appear before a board of officers and requested discharge  in  lieu
of board proceedings.  He further acknowledged he  understood  that
if his application was approved,  his  separation  could  be  under
conditions other than honorable, he could  receive  an  undesirable
discharge, and that this may deprive him of  rights  as  a  veteran
under both federal and state legislation ….

On  23  Sep  55,  a  medical  narrative  summary,  recommended  the
applicant appear before a  board  of  officers  for  administrative
separation.

On 12 Oct 55, applicant was discharged under the provisions of  AFR
39-17,  Discharge  of  Airmen  Because  of   Unfitness,   with   an
undesirable discharge.  He was credited with 5 months and 3 days of
active duty service.

On  4  Apr  56,  the  Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Board  (AFDRB)
considered the applicant’s request  to  upgrade  his  discharge  to
fully honorable.  However,  they  concluded  applicant’s  discharge
should be upgraded to general under honorable conditions, under the
provisions of AFR 39-16 (See AFDRB Hearing Record at Exhibit B).

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

On 21 Sep 07, a copy  of  the  FBI  report  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant for comment.   At  that  time,  the  applicant  was  also
invited to provide additional evidence pertaining to his activities
since leaving the service (Exhibit D).

By letter, dated 1 Oct 07, applicant  explained  the  circumstances
surrounding the incidents cited on his FBI Report of Investigation.
 Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit E.

At  the  time   of   the   applicant’s   discharge,   the   service
characterization received was appropriate under the  provisions  of
the governing regulation  in  effect  at  the  time.   Attached  at
Exhibit  F,  is  an  excerpt  from  AFI   36-3208,   Administrative
Separation  of  Airmen,  which  shows  the  current  criteria   for
determining  the  characterization   of   service   under   similar
circumstances.  Additionally, notwithstanding the absence of  error
or injustice, the Board has the prerogative to grant relief on  the
basis of clemency if so inclined.

Attached at Exhibit G, is a memorandum prepared by  the  Air  Force
Review  Boards  Agency  Legal  Advisor  addressing  the  issue   of
characterization of service and how standards  have  changed  since
1959.

___________________________________________________________________

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.  Subsequent to his discharge, the AFDRB upgraded  applicant’s
discharge to general (under honorable conditions).   We  considered
upgrading the discharge to fully honorable; however, based  on  the
earlier decision of the AFDRB and the post-service submitted in the
applicant’s  behalf,  we  do  not  find  the   evidence   presented
sufficient enough 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 AFBCMR Docket  Number
BC-2007-02110 in Executive Session on 25 October  2007,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
      Ms. Karen A. Holloman, Member
      Mr. Wallace F. Beard Jr., Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Jun 07, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  FBI Report of Investigation.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 21 Sep 07, w/atchs.
    Exhibit E.  Air Force Instruction 36-3208.
    Exhibit F.  Memorandum, SAF/MRB Legal Advisor, 17 Apr 07.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, Applicant, dated 1 Oct 07.




                                   KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
                                   Panel Chair