RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2001-02983
                                       INDEX CODE:  110.02
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX               COUNSEL: NONE

      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX                   HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be  upgraded  to
honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He did not understand the discharge  he  was  accepting  and  how  it  would
affect his future.  He has not been able to get a decent job because of  the
type of discharge he received.  He did not do anything against  his  country
to deserve such a devastating penalty.

In support  of  his  application,  he  provided  a  copy  of  DD  Form  293,
Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the  Armed  Forces
of the United States.  A copy of the applicant’s  complete  submission  with
attachment is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 16 January 1977, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force  at  the
age of 21 in the grade of airman basic (E-1) for a  period  of  four  years.
The applicant was being trained in  the  Air  Force  Specialty  Code  (AFSC)
42732, Non-Destructive Inspection Specialist.  His records  do  not  contain
an Airman Performance Report.

On 20 December 1977, the applicant  received  nonjudicial  punishment  under
Article 15 for failure to go  on  17  December  1977.   Punishment  included
forfeiture of $150 for 2 months and correctional custody for  30  days.   On
22 December 1977, all punishment was suspended until 1  April  1978.   On  4
January 1978, the applicant was absent without leave (AWOL) until 5  January
1978.  On 9 January 1978, his previously suspended punishment under  Article
15 was vacated and the applicant was ordered to forfeit $150 per  month  for
two months.  In the meantime, the applicant was disenrolled  from  technical
training on 23 December 1977 due to academic deficiency over  which  he  had
no control.

On 11 January 1978, the applicant was charged with possession  of  marijuana
and drug paraphernalia.  The applicant consulted his  area  defense  counsel
(ADC) and while still undergoing investigation,  he  requested  a  discharge
for the good of the service and stated he did not desire  to  volunteer  for
probation and rehabilitation (P&R).  On 23 January 1978, his  commander  and
intermediate commander recommended approval of the discharge with a  general
discharge.   The  staff  judge  advocate  found  the  case  to  be   legally
sufficient on 23 January 1978; however, recommended a  UOTHC  discharge  due
to the seriousness of the applicant’s offenses and his history  of  frequent
misconduct.  The discharge authority approved the discharge  on  24  January
1978 and ordered an UOTHC characterization without P&R.  The  applicant  was
discharged effective 30 January 1978  under  the  provisions  of  AFR  39-12
(resignation for the good of the service) with an UOTHC characterization  of
service.  He had served 7 months, and 14 days  on  active  duty.   His  time
lost was 1 day due to being AWOL.

Pursuant to the  Board’s  request,  the  Federal  Bureau  of  Investigation,
Clarksburg, WV, provided a copy of an  Investigation  Report  pertaining  to
the applicant, which is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states  the  discharge  was  consistent
with  the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements   of   the   discharge
regulation and was within the discretion of the  discharge  authority.   The
applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors  or  injustices
that occurred in the  discharge  processing.   Additionally,  the  applicant
provided no facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge he  received.   The
DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluation and the FBI report were forwarded to  the
applicant on 31 December 2002 and 2 April 2003 for review and  comment.   On
24 February  2003,  the  applicant  was  given  the  opportunity  to  submit
comments about his post service activities.  As of this  date,  this  office
has received no response (Exhibits D and F).

_________________________________________________________________

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 probable error or injustice.  The applicant  did  not  provide
persuasive evidence showing the  information  in  the  discharge  case  was
erroneous, his substantial rights were violated,  or  that  his  commanders
abused their discretionary authority.  The  characterization  of  discharge
which was issued at the  time  of  the  applicant’s  separation  accurately
reflects the circumstances of  his  separation  and  we  do  not  find  the
characterization of discharge to be in error or  unjust.   Furthermore,  in
view of the information contained in the  FBI  investigative  report  which
indicates the applicant has not made a successful post service  adjustment,
we do not find favorable consideration of his appeal based on  clemency  is
appropriate.   Therefore,  the  applicant’s  request   is   not   favorably
considered.

_________________________________________________________________

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 this application in  Executive
Session on 14 May 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Panel Chair
      Mr. David W. Mulgrew, Member
      Ms. Barbara J. White-Olson, Member


The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR  Docket  Number  BC-2001-02983
was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 Nov 2002, with attachment.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 10 Dec 2002.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Dec 2002.
      Exhibit E.  FBI Report #675990P1, dated 21 Mar 2003.
      Exhibit F.  Letters, AFBCMR, dated 24 Feb and 2 Apr 2003.




                                  BRENDA L. ROMINE
                                                   Panel Chair