RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00259
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general  (under  honorable  conditions)  discharge  be  upgraded  to  an
honorable discharge and that all negative  documentation  be  expunged  from
his records.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

On 4 February 1992, he sustained multiple  injuries  from  a  motor  vehicle
accident.  For the next eight weeks  his  health  affected  his  ability  to
work.  There were days when he could barely walk, eat, or drink  because  of
his injuries.  In conjunction with his medical problems, his  wife  informed
him of her intent to file for a divorce.  The combination  of  his  physical
injuries  and  the  emotional  stress  of   the   impending   divorce   were
devastating.  He received Article 15s for failure to report to his place  of
duty and for failure to go to duty at the  time  prescribed.   Although  his
actions were not commendable, he  accepted  the  punishment.   He  indicates
that his actions did not appear to be worthy of justification for less  than
an honorable discharge.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a  personal  statement,  DA
Forms 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report) dated  24  June  2001
and 27 July 2001, and other documentation.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 1 December 1988 for a  period
of four (4) years.

On 18 December 1990, the applicant was notified of  his  commander’s  intent
to impose nonjudicial punishment upon him for the  following:   He  did,  at
RAF Mildenhall, United  Kingdom,  on  or  about  6  December  1990,  without
authority, fail to go at the time  prescribed  to  his  appointed  place  of
duty, to wit:  Building 582, at 1530 hours.

After consulting with counsel, applicant waived his  right  to  a  trial  by
court-martial, submitted a written presentation in his behalf and  requested
to make a personal appearance.  However,  he  did  not  desire  that  it  be
public.

On 28 December 1990, he was found guilty by his commander  who  imposed  the
following punishment: Reduction to the grade of airman and a  forfeiture  of
$100.00 pay per month for two months.  Reduction to the grade of airman  was
suspended until 26 June 1991, at which time it  would  be  remitted  without
further action unless sooner vacated.

On 28 December 1990, the  applicant  did  appeal  the  punishment  but  then
withdrew  the  appeal.   The  Article  15  was  filed  in  his   Unfavorable
Information File (UIF).

On 17 April 1992, the applicant was notified of his  commander’s  intent  to
impose nonjudicial punishment upon  him  for  the  following:   He  did,  at
McGuire Air Force Base, New Jersey, on  or  about  10  April  1992,  without
authority, go from his appointed place  of  duty,  to  wit:  Building  2611,
McGuire AFB, New Jersey.

After consulting with counsel, applicant waived his  right  to  a  trial  by
court-martial, submitted a written presentation in his behalf and  requested
to make a personal appearance.  However, he again did not desire that it  be
public.

On 5 May 1992, he  was  found  guilty  by  his  commander  who  imposed  the
following punishment: Reduction to the grade of airman first class,  with  a
new date of rank of 5 May 1992.

The applicant did not appeal the punishment and the Article 15 was filed  in
his Unfavorable Information File (UIF).

On 20 May 1992, the applicant was notified  of  his  commander's  intent  to
initiate discharge action against him for  Minor  Disciplinary  Infractions.
Specific reasons are listed above and as follows:

        On 19 March 1992, the applicant’s dorm room  was  not  prepared  for
carpet installation.  His room  was  extremely  unkept  and  stunk  of  poor
personal hygiene,  filth,  and  animal  odors.   He  received  a  Letter  of
Reprimand/Unfavorable Information File, dated 20 March 1992.

The commander indicated in his  recommendation  for  discharge  that  before
recommending the discharge he ensured  the  applicant  was  counseled.   The
Supply Squadron  had  given  the  applicant  ample  opportunity  to  correct
previous misconduct.  He had received letters of reprimand and  two  Article
15s within this enlistment.  Minimal improvement had  been  noted.   He  did
not meet the standards of quality required by the United States  Air  Force.
The commander did not recommend probation and  rehabilitation  according  to
chapter 7.  Previous rehabilitation efforts were not successful.

The commander advised the applicant of his right to  consult  legal  counsel
and submit statements in his own behalf, or waive  the  above  rights  after
consulting with counsel.

After consulting with counsel the applicant submitted statements in his  own
behalf.

On 8 June 1992, the Staff Judge Advocate recommended that the  applicant  be
separated with a general  (under  honorable  conditions)  discharge  without
probation and rehabilitation.

On 10 June 1992, the discharge authority approved the discharge.

Applicant was discharged on 18 June 1992,  in  the  grade  of  airman  first
class with a general  (under  honorable  conditions)  discharge,  under  the
provisions  of  AFR  39-10  (Misconduct  -  Pattern  of  Minor  Disciplinary
Infractions).  He served 3 years, 6 months  and  18  days  of  total  active
military service.

On  24  February  1993,  the  Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Board   (AFDRB)
considered and denied the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge  from
general (under honorable conditions) to honorable.  They concluded that  the
discharge was consistent with the procedural  and  substantive  requirements
of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of  the  discharge
authority and that  the  applicant  was  provided  full  administrative  due
process (Exhibit B).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS  recommended  denial.   They  indicated  that  based   upon   the
documentation in the file, they believe the discharge  was  consistent  with
the procedural and substantive requirements  of  the  discharge  regulation.
Additionally, the discharge was  within  the  discretion  of  the  discharge
authority.

The applicant submitted statements  but  did  not  identify  any  errors  or
injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  He provided no  other
facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge.  He has  not  filed  a  timely
request.


The evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the  evaluation  and  indicated  that  he  did  wrong
things but the punishment did not fit the crime.  He does not  deserve  what
his  life  has  been  since  discharge.   He  is  currently  employed  as  a
correctional officer and indicates that it is his desire to  go  to  college
and become a registered nurse and serve  the  civilian  world  and  the  Air
Force.  His family has a proud military  heritage  in  the  enlisted  ranks.
This discharge has brought a stigma to his family.  He  has  provided  post-
service documentation and asks for clemency.

Applicant’s response, with attachments, is 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.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to  demonstrate  the
existence of error or injustice.   No  evidence  has  been  presented  which
would lead us to believe his discharge  was  improper  or  contrary  to  the
directive under which it was effected.   Nevertheless,  the  Board  majority
finds that in view of the  applicant’s  successful  transition  to  civilian
life, as evidenced  by  the  post-service  documentation  he  has  provided,
upgrading  his  discharge  to  honorable,  based  on  clemency,   would   be
appropriate.  The Board majority recommends  that  the  applicant’s  general
(under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable.

4.    No evidence has been presented to  justify  removal  of  all  negative
documentation from his records.  The applicant’s request to expunge the  two
Article 15s and a  Letter  of  Reprimand/Unfavorable  Information  File  was
considered.  However, the applicant has not  established  that  he  did  not
commit the misconduct which resulted in the nonjudicial punishment nor  that
the commander abused his discretionary authority to impose  the  punishment.
We  find  no  compelling  basis  upon  which  to  set  aside  any   negative
documentation  in  the  applicant’s  records,  other  than  the  change   in
discharge characterization as noted above.

_________________________________________________________________


THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air  Force  relating
to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 18 June 1992,  he  was  honorably
discharged and issued an Honorable Discharge Certificate.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2002-
03645 in Executive Session on 1 May 2003, under the provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                  Mr. Philip Sheuerman, Panel Chair
                  Ms. Martha J. Evans, Member
                  Mr. Christopher Carey, Member

By a majority vote, the Board voted to correct the records, as  recommended.
 Mr. Carey voted to deny the entire  application  and  does  not  desire  to
submit  a  minority  report.   The  following   documentary   evidence   was
considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 January 2003, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 12 February 2003.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 February 2003.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 10 March 2003, w/atchs.





                                PHILIP SHEUERMAN
                                Panel Chair

AFBCMR BC-2003-00259





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  , be corrected to show that on 18 June 1992, he was honorably
discharged and issued an Honorable Discharge Certificate.





            JOE G. LINEBERGER
            Director
            Air Force Review Boards Agency