RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  99-03118
            INDEX NUMBER:110.02

            COUNSEL: NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His 6 December 1991 general (under honorable conditions)  discharge
be upgraded to honorable.

His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or  Discharge  from  Active
Duty), Item 19b, (Nearest  Relative)  be  changed  to  reflect  his
adopted mother rather than his biological mother.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His discharge was improper because his biological mother was listed
as his nearest relative on his DD Form 214 rather than his  adopted
mother.  He was not provided counsel on this issue.

The squadron commander did not consider him for  rehabilitation  as
an option in his case.

His discharge was inequitable because it was based on one  isolated
incident in 26 months of service with no other adverse actions.

The      State District Court expunged  the  record  of  misconduct
with the      State Police in 1997.

In support of the appeal,  applicant  submitted  several  character
statements from former commanders, supervisors,  and  coworkers,  a
letter  of  congratulations,  certificates  of   appreciation   and
achievement, and an enlisted performance report.  He also  included
documentation  pertaining  to  his  civil  court   conviction   and
subsequent set aside of the conviction  in  1997,  and  transcripts
from civilian institutions that indicate his accomplishments  since
his discharge.

Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 18 August 1989, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air  Force
in the grade of airman basic.  Prior to the events cited below,  he
was promoted to the grade of airman  first  class  (E-3).   He  had
received  one  performance  report  with   an   overall   promotion
recommendation of 5.

On   21   November   1991,   the   squadron   commander   initiated
administrative  discharge  action   against   the   applicant   for
misconduct, to wit: commission of a serious offense.  The  specific
reason for the proposed action was that on  or  about  2  September
1991, applicant stole a stereo system from a vehicle, as  evidenced
by a Letter of Reprimand, dated 20 November  1991.   The  commander
stated that before recommending the discharge, applicant received a
Judgement of Sentence/Order of Probation stating he was to serve 30
days in jail; 20 days, beginning  4  December  1991,  and  10  days
suspended if all conditions of probation were met  and  restitution
made.   He  did  not  recommend   applicant   for   probation   and
rehabilitation, stating that the applicant failed to meet Air Force
standards of acceptable conduct.

On 22 November 1991, after consulting with counsel and having  been
advised of his rights, applicant submitted  documents  in  his  own
behalf.  On 2 December 1991, the Staff  Judge  Advocate  found  the
file  legally  sufficient  to  support  discharge.   The  discharge
authority approved  a  general  discharge,  without  probation  and
rehabilitation.

On  6  December  1991,  the  applicant  was  discharged  under  the
provisions of AFR 39-10,  with  service  characterized  as  general
(under honorable conditions).  He served 2 years, 4 months, and  19
days on active duty.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 7 March 2000, the  Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Board  (AFDRB)
considered and denied applicant’s request for  an  upgrade  of  his
general discharge to honorable.   A  complete  copy  of  the  AFDRB
Hearing Record is attached at Exhibit C.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed  the  AFDRB  Hearing  Record  and  submitted
additional documentation to  further  substantiate  his  contention
that his 13 November 1991 civil court conviction had been  expunged
in 1997.

A complete copy of applicant’s response is attached 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.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to  demonstrate
the  existence  of  probable  error  or  injustice  warranting   an
administrative change on applicant’s DD Form 214, Item 19b, Nearest
Relative, to reflect his  adopted  mother’s  name.   Therefore,  we
recommend his records be corrected to the extent indicated below.

4.  Insufficient  relevant   evidence   has   been   presented   to
demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice warranting
 favorable consideration of the applicant’s request for an  upgrade
of the characterization of his discharge.  We took  notice  of  the
applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the  case.
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.
 We therefore agree with the decision of the AFDRB and adopt  their
rationale as the  basis  for  our  conclusion  that  the  discharge
proceedings were proper and the characterization of  the  discharge
was appropriate to the existing circumstances.  Therefore,  in  the
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to
disturb the existing record.

___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT, be  corrected  to  show  that  his  DD  Form
214,(Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty),  issued
in conjunction with  his  6  December  1991  discharge,  Item  19b,
(Nearest Relative), be changed to read: ----.

___________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this  application  in
Executive Session on 26 July 2000, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Panel Chair
      Mr. Gregory H. Petkoff, Member
      Mr. Edward H. Parker, Member

All members voted to correct  the  records,  as  recommended.   The
following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 Nov 1999, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  AFDRB Hearing Record, dated 13 Mar 2000.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 14 Apr 2000.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, Fingerprint Search Response, undated.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Panel Chair


AFBCMR 99-03118




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 that:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that the DD Form
214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), issued
in conjunction with his 6 December 1991 discharge, Item 19b
(Nearest Relative), be changed to read:  ----.






            JOE G. LINEBERGER
            Director
            Air Force Review Boards Agency