RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00303
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He believes he was discharged six months earlier because he refused to
reenlist for another four years.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits two  personal  statements,
an excerpt from an Army Regulation Concerning Criteria  for  Honorable
Discharges, a character reference and six certificates.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 16 February 1972.

Applicant was progressively promoted to the grade  of  sergeant  on  1
April 1974.

APR profile since 1972 reflects the following:

      PERIOD ENDING    EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL

       30 Nov 72       8
       30 Nov 73       8
       13 Aug 74       7

On 22 April 1975, the commander notified the  applicant  that  he  was
recommending him for a  general  discharge  because  of  his  frequent
involvement  of  a  discreditable  nature  with  military  and   civil
authorities and drug abuse.  Specifically:  a Letter of  Reprimand  on
16 August 1974 for reading prohibited material while on  duty  as  the
Desk Sergeant; on 3 December 1974, he was convicted by a special court-
martial for breaking and entering the Base Exchange on 13 October 1974
and stealing items of a value of less than  $50;  and  on  13  October
1974, possession of hashish.  Sentence:  To be confined at hard  labor
for four months.  The  sentence  was  adjudged  on  3  December  1974.
After being counseled by Capt W--- P. M---, a qualified legal counsel,
applicant waived his right  to  a  hearing  before  an  administrative
discharge board and did not  submit  statements  in  his  own  behalf.
Probation and rehabilitation (P&R) were not recommended (by  the  Vice
Commander) because the applicant had been  given  ample  opportunities
and time to rehabilitate himself, but failed to take advantage of  the
opportunities afforded him.   The  Discharge  Authority  approved  the
discharge and ordered a general discharge without  P&R.   He  had  100
days of lost time due to confinement.

The applicant, while  serving  in  the  grade  of  airman  basic,  was
discharged from the Air Force on 12 May 1975 under the  provisions  of
AFM 39-12 (frequent involvement of a discreditable nature  with  civil
and military authorities) and received an under  honorable  conditions
(general) discharge.  He served 3 years and 28 days  of  total  active
service.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of  Investigation,
Clarksburg,  West  Virginia,  indicated  on  the  basis  of  the  data
furnished they were unable to locate an arrest record.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS states that 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.  Therefore,  they  recommend  denial  of  the
applicant’s request (see Exhibit C).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states that he is not contesting the  original  sentence
imposed under the provisions of AFM 39-12.  He fully accepts and stand
accountable for his actions during this very  stressful  part  of  his
life.  The punishment he received under the UCMJ  was  justified.   He
has learned to use this punishment as a positive learning tool now and
in  the  future  for  his  civilian  goals.   However,  based  on  his
immaculate record under his current  employer,  he  strongly  believes
upgrading his discharge to honorable  status  is  warranted.   He  has
requested a copy of his EPRs  so  that  he  may  review  any  and  all
derogatory information for accuracy.  Applicant's  complete  response,
with attachments, 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.  Insufficient  relevant   evidence   has   been   presented   to
demonstrate the existence of  probable  error  or  injustice.   The
majority of the Board found no impropriety in the  characterization
of applicant’s discharge.  His contentions are noted;  however,  it
appears that responsible officials applied appropriate standards in
effecting the separation, and the majority of the  Board  does  not
find persuasive evidence that pertinent regulations  were  violated
or that the service member was not afforded all the rights to which
entitled at the time of discharge.  The Board  majority  noted  the
evidence provided by the applicant pertaining to his  post  service
activities and does not find it sufficient to warrant relief  based
on clemency in the form of a fully honorable discharge.  The  Board
majority’s opinion in this regard is based on  the  seriousness  of
the infractions he committed against the good order and  discipline
of the service.  In view of the above, the Board majority finds the
applicant’s service is accurately characterized as “under honorable
conditions” and finds no basis upon which  to  recommend  favorable
action on this application.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and  it  has  not
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel  will
materially  add  to  our  understanding  of  the  issues  involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD:

A majority of the panel finds insufficient  evidence  of  error  or
injustice and recommends the application be denied.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 8 May 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Vice Chair
                       Mr. James W. Russell, III, Member
                       Ms. Cheryl Jacobson, Member

By  a  majority  vote,  the  Board  recommended   denial   of   the
application.  Ms. Jacobson voted to correct the records and submits
a  Minority  Report.   The  following  documentary   evidence   was
considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 Feb 03, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 25 Feb 03.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Mar 03.
      Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Response, dated 31 Mar 03, w/atchs.
      Exhibit F.  Minority Report.




                             THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                             Vice Chair

AFBCMR BC-2003-00303




MEMORANDUM FOR THE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE REVIEW BOARDS AGENCY


SUBJECT:  Minority Report on AFBCMR Case of

      I have carefully considered all the circumstances of this case
and disagree with the majority of the panel that the applicant’s
request should be denied.

      While the evidence does not support a finding that the actions
taken to effect the applicant’s discharge were erroneous, I believe
clemency would be appropriate in this case based on the following
considerations.  The record indicates that the applicant served
honorably and well for approximately two and one-half years before he
committed the first offense that led to his separation.  The evidence
he has provided substantiates to my satisfaction that he has made a
successful post service adjustment.  He has lived with the adverse
effects of his discharge for 28 years and I believe that the continued
imposition of the discharge would constitute an injustice.

      In view of the above, I believe that approval of the requested
relief based on clemency would be appropriate.




                                  CHERYL JACOBSON
                                  Panel Member


AFBCMR BC-2003-00303




MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD


                                       FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY
RECORDS (AFBCMR)


SUBJECT:  AFBCMR Case of

      I have carefully considered all the circumstances of this case
and do not agree with the opinion of the majority of the Panel that
the applicant’s request that his discharge be upgraded should be
denied.

      I agree with the minority member that the applicant’s discharge
should be upgraded to honorable on the basis of clemency.  The record
indicates that the applicant served honorably for approximately two
and one-half years before he committed the first offense that led to
his separation.  The applicant, in his rebuttal, accepted
responsibility and expressed contrition for his actions.  It appears
that in the 28 years since his separation, he has become a useful and
productive member of his community.  For these reasons, I believe the
continued imposition of his current service characterization would
constitute an injustice.

      Therefore, I direct that the applicant’s record be corrected to
show he was honorably discharged.




                                  JOE G. LINEBERGER
                                  Director
                                  Air Force Review Boards Agency











AFBCMR BC-2003-00303
INDEX CODE:  110.00




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 12 May 1975, he was honorably
discharged and furnished an Honorable Discharge certificate.





                                        JOE G. LINEBERGER
                                        Director
                                        Air Force Review Boards Agency