RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  02-03208
                                        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 had no legal representation to contest the type of discharge he  would
receive.  He served his country faithfully.

Applicant submits no supporting documentation.  Applicant’s submission is
at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 4 July 1977, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air  Force  in  the
grade of airman basic (E-1) for a  period  of  4  years  (extended  to  3
January 1982 for PCS retainability).  He was  progressively  promoted  to
the grade of airman first class (E-3), effective and with a date of  rank
of 1 May 1967.  He received two Airman Performance Reports (APR)  closing
1 September 1978 and 1 September 1979 respectively, in which his  overall
evaluations were 8 (9 being the highest rating).

On 13 September 1978, he was charged with being absent without authority.
 For this incident, punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military
Justice (UCMJ), was imposed.  He received a suspended reduction to airman
and $78 forfeiture of his pay.  On 25 October 1978, the suspended  action
was vacated for failure to go at the time  prescribed  to  his  appointed
place of duty and he was reduced to the grade of airman.

On 30 January 1980, he was charged with being drunk and disorderly.   For
this incident, punishment  under  Article  15,  UCMJ,  was  imposed.   He
received a suspended reduction to airman and $75 forfeiture of  his  pay.
On 6 March 1980, the suspended action was vacated for failure  to  go  at
the time prescribed to his appointed  place  of  duty  and  disobeying  a
lawful order.  As a result, he was reduced to the grade of airman.
On 22 March 1980, he received a USAFE Form 330, Record of Counseling, for
failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty.

On  22  April  1980,  the  applicant’s  commander   initiated   discharge
proceedings against him under the provisions of AFM 39-12,  paragraph  2-
15(a), for frequent involvement of a discreditable nature  with  military
authorities.    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; however, in a  statement  signed
by his squadron section commander and witnessed by his first sergeant, it
was  indicated  the  applicant  had  refused  to  sign  his   letter   of
notification and to meet with military legal counsel.  On 12 and  13  May
1980, an evaluation of the case file was conducted.  Following his review
of the record and an interview with the applicant, the evaluation officer
recommended a general discharge and  stated  that  the  applicant  was  a
suitable candidate for rehabilitation.  In a statement dated 13 May 1980,
the applicant certified he had been interviewed by the evaluation officer
and acknowledged he had been advised of his rights.  In a short statement
in his own defense, he attributed his actions to a problem with  alcohol.
He indicated he had voluntarily entered  a  rehabilitation  program.   He
requested retention in the Air Force.  In a legal review of the discharge
case file, the staff judge  advocate  found  it  legally  sufficient  and
recommended that the applicant be discharged from the Air  Force  with  a
general discharge as recommended by the evaluation officer.  However, the
staff  judge  advocate  recommended  probation  and   rehabilitation   be
disapproved.  On 20 May 1980, the discharge authority directed  that  the
applicant be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFM 39-
12, Chapter 2, for frequent involvement of a  discreditable  nature  with
military authorities.  The discharge authority  indicated  he  considered
probation and rehabilitation inappropriate.  The applicant was discharged
on 2 June 1980 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.  He
served 2 years, 10 months and 29 days on active duty.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied.  DPPRS states that since
the applicant did not provide any supporting documentation to upgrade his
discharge, they conclude that  the  discharge  was  consistent  with  the
procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge  regulation  and
that the applicant did not identify  any  errors  or  injustices  in  the
discharge processing.  The Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy  of  the  Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 8 November 2002, for review and response.  As of this  date,
this office has received no response.

___________________________________________________________________

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 a thorough review of the evidence
of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded  that  his
discharge should be upgraded to honorable.  We have noted the applicant’s
assertion that he did not receive legal counsel in order to  dispute  the
type of discharge he would receive.  In this regard, the  discharge  case
file shows that he was offered legal counsel  but  chose  not  to  afford
himself of this venue.  Other than his own assertions, we  have  seen  no
evidence by the applicant showing that the information in  the  discharge
case file is erroneous, his substantial rights were violated, or that his
commanders abused their discretionary authority.  In view  of  the  above
and absent persuasive evidence to the contrary,  we  find  no  compelling
basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

___________________________________________________________________

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  in
Executive Session on 19 March 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

           Mr. Roscoe Hinton Jr, Panel Chair
           Ms. Dorothy P. Loeb, Member
           Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Member

The following documentary  evidence  was  considered  for  AFBCMR  Docket
Number 02-03280:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 September 2002.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 29 October 2002.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 November 2002.





                                  ROSCOE HINTON JR
                                  Panel Chair