RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00667 

COUNSEL: NONE 
HEARING DESIRED: YES 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

1. His charge of being absent without leave (AWOL) be removed. 
2. His loss of rank and pay as a result of being charged withAWOL be restored. 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

The charge of being absent without leave (AWOL) and resultingArticle 15 punishment should be removed because he should nothave been charged with AWOL, since he was admitted into aDepartment of Veterans Affairs (DVA) hospital during the sametime. His commander at his gaining base was not aware of hiswhereabouts and charged him as being AWOL. 

In addition, based on a news report from the applicant he wasstationed in the Marshall Islands and participated in “OperationCastle.” This was a secret military operation where hydrogenbombs were detonated above ground for tests. Manyservicemembers witnessed these blasts from a relatively short 
distance, in his case, he was no more than 75 to 100 miles away.
He believes some of symptoms he is now experiencing are theresults of exposure to radiation from the blasts and seeks fullbenefits through the DVA. 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of thehospital records; extracts from his military personnel record;
extracts of his DVA records; letter of supports through hisMember of Congress and several newspaper articles noting hisexperiences during his service and difficulties with medicalconditions resulting from his assignment in the South Pacific. 

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is atExhibit A. 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force, on 17 Jul 52,
for a period of four years. He was promoted to the grade of 


airman second class (A3C/E-2) (Permanent) with a Date of Rank(DOR) of 5 Mar 53. 

According to his SF Form 502, Clinical Record, Narrative 
Summary, dated 16 Dec 54, on 9 Nov 54, the applicant received apenicillin injection, after complaining of a sore throat, on orabout 7 Nov 54. On 11 Nov 54, without any improvement, he wasadmitted in the VA hospital. He had difficulty swallowing andappeared to be acutely ill. On 15 Nov 54, he was diagnosed withTonsillitis, acute – treated, improved, and was discharged fromthe hospital. On 19 Nov 54, the applicant reported to militaryauthorities. 

On 20 Nov 54, the applicant was placed in confinement and thenwas transported to several bases before being directed to reportto his home station not later than 10 Dec 54. 

On 14 Dec 54, the applicant received an Article 15, for beingAWOL, on or about 9 – 18 Nov 54. His punishment consisted of areduction to the grade of airman basic with a DOR of 14 Dec 54. 
He did not appeal the punishment. 

On 8 Sep 56, the applicant, while serving in the grade of airmansecond class (A2C – E-3), was convicted by a Summary Court-
Martial with seven specifications of lending money to sevenairmen at a high rate of interest, in violation of Article 134,
Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). For this offense he 
was sentenced with a reduction to the grade airman third classand forfeiture of $65.00. 

The applicant was discharged on 11 Jan 57, with service 
characterized as general. He was credited with 4 years, 
5 months and 15 days of active duty service and 2 years, 
11 months and 21 days of foreign service, (including 10 days of 
lost time due to being AWOL). 

THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

AFPC/DPTOS did not provide a recommendation. They note, forinformational purposes, the applicant was in the hospital from11 Nov 54 through 15 Nov 54. The available documentation 
reflects the applicant was AWOL and in confinement, from 
9 Nov 54 through 7 Dec 54. 

The complete DPTOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

Through his Member of Congress, by letter dated 3 Jul 12, theapplicant indicated he was actually admitted to the hospital 

2 



prior to 9 Nov 54; that he was discharged on 15 Nov 54 and 
released into military custody. He was transferred to numerous 
locations before being returned to the base in California, on7 Dec 54. 

The applicant’s Member of Congress complete response, with 
attachment, is at Exhibit E. 

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial. JAJM states that nonjudicialpunishment is authorized by Article 15, UCMJ (10 U.S.C. § 815),
and in 1954 was governed by the 1951 Manual for Courts-Martial(MCM) (Part XXVI). This procedure permits commanders to disposeof certain offenses without trial by court-martial unless theservice member objects. A commander was to resort to "his powerunder Article 15 in every case in which punishment is deemednecessary." Service members first must be notified by theircommanders of the nature of the charged offenses and the 
commander's intent to impose the punishment unless trial bycourt-martial is demanded. The commander will also inform the 
service member that he may submit such matters as he desireseither in mitigation, extenuation, or defense. Accepting theproceedings is simply a choice of forum; it is not an admissionof guilt. Nonjudicial punishment is also not, when imposed, acriminal conviction. For each offense the member does not 
demand trial, the commander may proceed to impose punishment. 

The applicant does not allege error in how the Article 15 wasprocessed. In 1951, the only formal paperwork required for nonjudicial 
punishment was the recording of the punishment in theunit punishment book. A copy of the entry was not included inthe record; however, the record does include a memorandum dated14 Dec 1954, indorsed by the applicant’s commander stating thereduction in rank and acknowledged by the applicant on the samedate. The only document that may have been part of the Article15 that is provided is the indorsement by the applicant'scommander of the punishment to airman basic and the applicant'sacknowledgement of the punishment and that he did not appeal thepunishment. 

The applicant does allege he was hospitalized at the time of thecharged AWOL and that it was improper for him to receive the 
nonjudicial punishment because of that hospitalization. The 
commander at the time of this nonjudicial punishment action hadthe best opportunity to evaluate the evidence in the applicant'scase. With that perspective, the commander exercised the 
discretion that the applicant granted him when the applicantaccepted the Article 15 and found the nonjudicial punishment 
appropriate in the applicant's case. The applicant does notmake a compelling argument that the Board should overturn thecommanders' original nonjudicial punishment decision on the 

3 



basis of injustice. The commanders' ultimate decision on the 
Article 15 action is firmly based on the evidence of this caseat the time it happened and the punishment decision was wellwith the limits of the commander's authority and discretion. 

The complete JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit F. 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

By letter, dated 13 Dec 12, the applicant’s Member of Congressforwarded a letter to the Secretary of Defense. He notes the 
applicant adamantly disputes the statement that he has beentrying to correct this matter since Nov 11; in fact, he has beenpursuing the matter and first tried to correct this injustice in1954; however, his pleas were ignored. When he returned to the 
“base,” he received a reduction in rank and was shipped out thenext day. Based on the information showing that he was in facthospitalized at the time of having been deemed AWOL, leading tohis reduction in rank and pay, he is seeking this injustice becorrected. 

The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit H. 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided byexisting law or regulations. 
2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in theinterest 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, including his responseto the Air Force evaluation, in judging the merits of the case;
however, we find no evidence of an error or injustice thatoccurred during the nonjudicial punishment process as a resultof the charge of AWOL. Based on the available evidence of 
record, it appears the nonjudicial punishment was consistentwith the regulations and within the commander's discretionary 
authority. We note the applicant states that he was in the 
hospital during the same period he was charged with AWOL, theevidence of records reflects that he was AWOL prior to, andafter, his period of hospitalization. Therefore, the applicanthas failed to sustain his burden that he has been the victim of 
an error or injustice. It appears that his request somewhathinges on his lack of medical assistance, we recommend theapplicant continue to seek assistance with officials at the DVAand the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), who are in abetter position to address these issues. While we empathize 
4 



with the applicant’s circumstances, we are not persuaded thathis nonjudicial punishment should be set aside. In the absence 
of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which torecommend granting the relief sought. 

4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has notbeen shown that a personal appearance with or without counselwill materially add to the Board's understanding of the issuesinvolved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorablyconsidered. 
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; theapplication was denied without a personal appearance; and theapplication will only be reconsidered upon the submission ofnewly discovered relevant evidence not considered with thisapplication. 

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR DocketNumber BC-2012-00667 in Executive Session on 24 January 2013,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 Nov 11, w/atchs.

Exhibit B. Applicant's Available Master Personnel Records.

Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPTOS, dated 4 Apr 12.

Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Jun 12.

Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant’s Member of Congress,

dated 31 Jul 12, w/atch.

Exhibit F. Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 27 Nov 12.

Exhibit G. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 10 Dec 12, w/atch.

Exhibit H. Letter, Applicant’s Member of Congress,

dated 13 Dec 12, w/atchs. 

Panel Chair 

5