RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  02-03249
                                        INDEX CODE:  110.00
                                        COUNSEL:  NONE

                                        HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He is currently a full-time college student and is requesting his  discharge
be upgraded to honorable so he may receive assistance through the  GI  Bill.


Applicant provides no supporting documentation.   The  applicant’s  complete
submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 26 July 1996, the applicant enlisted in the  Regular  Air  Force  in  the
grade of airman basic (E-1) for a period of 4 years.  He  was  progressively
promoted to the grade of senior airman (E-4), effective and with a  date  of
rank of 26 July 1996.  He received two Airman  Performance  Reports  closing
25 March 1995 and 14 November 1995, in which the overall ratings were 4  and
5 respectively.

On 9 November 1994, he was  charged  with  being  drunk  and  disorderly  at
Kunsan Air Base, Republic of Korea.  For  this  incident,  punishment  under
Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), was  imposed.   He  was
reduced to the grade of airman basic, suspended until 1  July  1995,  unless
sooner  vacated,  forfeiture  of  $415.00  pay  per  month  for  2   months,
restriction to Misawa Air Base, Japan for 30 days  and  30  days’  of  extra
duty.

On 16 September 1996, a Memorandum For Record signed by his  squadron  first
sergeant indicated that within a 10-day period the  applicant  had  two  (2)
alcohol  related  incidents,   28 August   1996   and   5   September   1996
respectively.  At that time, the applicant indicated  he  would  not  attend
substance abuse rehabilitation counseling, Track 4 because he felt it was  a
waste of his time.  He stated he enjoyed drinking and that he was not  going
to stop drinking even if he was put into Track 4.   On  10  September  1996,
during an intervention meeting, applicant stated  he  would  be  willing  to
attend Track 4 as an outpatient but not as an  inpatient.   Substance  abuse
personnel, and his squadron commander and first  sergeant  all  agreed  that
Track 4 would not really help him because he had not admitted that he had  a
drinking problem and that he should be placed  in  Track  5  and  discharged
with an honorable discharge.

On  21  November  1996,  the  applicant’s  commander   initiated   discharge
proceedings against him under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, paragraph  5.32
(Alcohol  Rehabilitation  Failure).   The  applicant  was  notified  of  his
commander’s  recommendation  and  that  a  general   discharge   was   being
recommended.  He was advised of his rights in the matter.  After  consulting
military legal counsel, the applicant waived his right to submit  statements
in his behalf.  On 12 December 1996, the discharge authority  directed  that
the applicant be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions  of  AFI
36-3208, paragraph 5.32, (Alcohol Rehabilitation  Failure),  with  character
of service as general  (under  honorable  conditions).   The  applicant  was
discharged  on  12 December  1996  by  reason  of  “Alcohol   Rehabilitation
Failure” with a Separation Code of  “JPD”  and  a  Reenlistment  Eligibility
(RE) code of “2B.”  He had served 3 years, 4 months and 17  days  on  active
duty.

On 12 March 1999, the  Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Board  considered  and
denied his request for a discharge upgrade.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be  denied.   DPPRS  states  that  the
applicant did not submit evidence or identify any errors  in  the  discharge
processing.   Based  on  the  documentation  in  file,  the  discharge   was
consistent with the requirements of the discharge  regulation  (See  Exhibit
C).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 15 November 2002, a copy of the Air Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to
the applicant for review and comment.  As of  this  date,  this  office  has
received no response (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

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.   After  careful  consideration  of  the
applicant’s request  and  the  available  evidence  of  record,  we  see  no
evidence that would warrant an upgrade of his characterization  of  service.
The applicant has provided no evidence that would lead  us  to  believe  the
actions  taken  to  effect  his  discharge  were  improper,  or   that   the
information in his discharge case file is erroneous.  In view of  the  above
and in the absence of evidence, we find  no  basis  on  which  to  favorably
consider his request.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate
the existence of probable 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  this  application,  AFBCMR
Docket No. 02-02522, in  Executive  Session  on  5  March  2003,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Ms. Marilyn Thomas, Panel Chair
                 Mr. William H. Anderson, Member
                 Mr. Thomas J. Topolski, Jr, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 October 2002.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 7 November 2002.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 November 2002.




                                   MARILYN THOMAS
                                   Panel Chair