ADDENDUM TO
                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-1995-02072
                                             INDEX CODE:  106.00
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX                   COUNSEL:  NONE

                                             HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The discharge he received should not have been issued and was due to  racial
prejudice.

He had been separated from the Air Force for  1½  years  and  was  attending
school when he was  stopped  for  a  traffic  violation.  The  officers  who
searched his vehicle  found  approximately  4 ounces  of  illegal  moonshine
whiskey under his front  seat.   When  he  re-entered  the  Air  Force,  the
enlistment center conducted a background check and discovered the  incident.
 They told him that the incident was a misdemeanor which did not  require  a
waiver, and allowed him to reenlist.

He reenlisted to attend  the  Airman  Education  and  Commissioning  Program
(AECP) and his commanding officer was in favor of this; however,  his  first
sergeant did not favor this and stated that the Air Force did not  need  any
more black officers.  He passed all of  his  tests  and  the  commander  was
supposed to sign the necessary documents for him  to  enter  AECP;  however,
the commander was TDY for 90 days.

The Air Force had to conduct another background investigation on him  as  he
was working on B-52 aircraft using the security clearance from his  previous
enlistment.  When the background investigation results  were  received,  the
moonshine whiskey incident was revealed.  A lieutenant stated  that  he  had
wanted to get him out of the Air Force, this was  his  chance,  and  it  was
called a fraudulent  enlistment  because  his  records  did  not  include  a
waiver.  The lieutenant stated that he was the adjutant and could  recommend
that he be discharged before the commander returned, and since he  had  just
reenlisted, he had to recommend a general discharge.   He  should  not  have
been discharged and it was done because of racial prejudice.

In support of his appeal, he has provided a copy of a personal statement.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit F.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially  served  in  the  Regular  Air  Force  (RegAF)  from
29 October 1954 to 28 August 1958.  He reentered the RegAF in the  grade  of
airman third class (E-2) on 27 January 1961, and has been  credited  with  a
total of 3 years and 10 months of total active service, as his service  from
27 January  1961  until  his  discharge  was  voided   due   to   fraudulent
enlistment.

On 13 July 1961, the applicant was notified of  his  commander's  intent  to
recommend  him  for  a  general  discharge  for  misconduct   -   fraudulent
enlistment.  The commander stated the action was being taken because at  the
time  of  his  enlistment,  he  willfully  concealed  a  matter  which,   if
truthfully stated or revealed, would have induced  further  inquiry  by  the
recruiting authorities concerning his  qualifications  for  enlistment.   He
did this by initialing the “No” answer in Section  28  of  the  DD  Form  4,
Enlistment Record Armed Forces of the United States, which asked  “Have  you
ever been convicted of a felony, or any  other  offense,  or  adjudicated  a
youthful offender or juvenile  delinquent,  including  violations  of  local
ordinances?”   The  records  of  the  Hopkinsville  Kentucky  Police   Court
disclosed the following convictions:

        a. 28 January 1960 - Carrying Concealed Deadly  Weapon  (reduced  to
           Flourishing Deadly Weapon), second  offense,  fined  $100.00  and
           $8.00 costs

        b. Driving while Intoxicated Auto Damage – fined $100.00  and  $8.00
           costs; Possession  of  Illegal  Whiskey  (reduced  to  Breach  of
           Peace), fined $50.00 and $8.00 costs


The commander advised the applicant of his  rights  and,  on  14 July  1961,
after consulting with counsel, he waived his right to  a  hearing  before  a
board of officers and to submit statements in his own behalf.

The Commander’s Recommendation for Discharge to the  Wing  Commander  stated
the applicant’s performance of duty  and  behavior  while  assigned  to  his
organization had been excellent.

On 30 August 1961, the applicant was  discharged  in  the  grade  of  airman
third class (E-2)  under  the  provisions  of  AFR  39-21,  section  F,  for
misconduct - fraudulent  enlistment,  with  an  under  honorable  conditions
(general) service characterization.

On 30 January 1980, the applicant appeared, with  counsel,  before  the  Air
Force Discharge Review Board  (AFDRB),  to  appeal  that  his  discharge  be
upgraded to honorable.  The AFDRB noted that  although  he  claimed  he  was
confused by, or misunderstood, question number 28 on the DD Form 4,  he  did
not adequately explain why  he  answered  “No”  to  the  previous  question:
“Have you ever been arrested, charged, or held by Federal, State,  or  other
law enforcement authorities?”, and they were unconvinced  by  his  testimony
that the concealment was a mistake.  They also noted that although his  duty
performance during the short period of this enlistment appears to have  been
good, the discharge authority apparently took  this  duty  performance  into
consideration when he directed the issuance of a general  discharge  instead
of a discharge under other than honorable conditions.  They determined  that
the  discharge  was  consistent  with   the   procedural   and   substantive
requirements of the discharge regulation, was within the discretion  of  the
discharge  authority,   and   that   the   applicant   was   afforded   full
administrative due  process.   They  concluded  that  he  had  submitted  no
creditable evidence that his discharge  was  improper  or  inequitable,  and
that his discharge should not be changed.

On 30 April 1997, the Board considered his request  to  receive  credit  for
his 27 February 1961 enlistment.  For an accounting of the rationale of  the
earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit E.

On 28 November 2007, the applicant submitted a request for  reconsideration,
requesting that  his  under  honorable  conditions  (general)  discharge  be
upgraded  to  honorable.   The   applicant’s   complete   submission,   with
attachment, is at Exhibit F.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation  (FBI),
Clarksburg, WV, provided a copy of  an  Investigation  Report  which  is  at
Exhibit G.  On 11 January 2008, a copy of the FBI report and a  request  for
post-service information were forwarded to  the  applicant  for  review  and
comment within 30 days, and his response is at Exhibit I.

_______________________________________________________________

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 that  the
discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the  discharge
regulation  and  within  the  commander’s  discretionary   authority.    The
applicant’s contentions are noted; however, he has not provided evidence  to
substantiate these contentions.  Moreover, we find that  he  has  failed  to
substantiate that the actions of his chain of command were unreasonable,  or
to  provide  sufficient  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, the applicant has not provided any information concerning his post-
service activities and accomplishments  for  us  to  conclude  that  he  has
overcome the behavioral traits which caused the discharge,  and  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  Docket  Number  BC-1995-02072
in Executive Session on 12 February 2008, under the provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                       Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Karen A. Holloman, Member
                       Mr. Wallace F. Beard, Jr., Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit E.  Record of Proceedings, dated 30 Apr 97, w/atchs.
    Exhibit F.  DD Form 149, dated 28 Nov 07, w/atch.
    Exhibit G.  USDOJ FBI Report, dated 7 Dec 07.
    Exhibit H.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 11 Jan 08, w/atchs.
    Exhibit I.  Letter, Applicant, dated 18 Jan 07.




                                   CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
                                   Panel Chair