RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02089

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The record is not in error.  He is begging for a record review of  his
discharge and an upgrade in status from a general to an honorable.  He
has learned from his errors and cannot change his past.  He wants  his
children and grandchildren to be proud he served his country.

In support of his application, he submits a copy of his DD  Form  293,
Applicant for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the
Armed Forces of the United States and a copy of DD Form 214.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic for
a period of 4 years on 4 April 1975.   He  was  discharged  under  the
provisions of AFR 39-12,  (frequent  involvement  of  a  discreditable
nature with military authorities) on  23  June  1978  with  a  general
(under honorable conditions) discharge.  He served 3 years,  2  months
and 20 days of total active duty service.

On 19  May  1978,  the  applicant’s  commander  notified  him  he  was
recommending him for discharge because of his frequent involvement  of
a discreditable nature with military authorities.  Basis  for  action:
arrested by Aurora CO police on  13  October  1977  and  charged  with
speeding and driving under the influence of alcohol; counseled  on  21
October,  9,  18  and  25  November  1977  for  issuing  checks   with
insufficient funds; 18 November 1977, missed medical appointment;  and
18 January 1978,  arrested  by  Aurora  CO  police  and  charged  with
possession of marijuana and unlawful harboring of a juvenile  runaway.
He pleaded guilty to possession of marijuana and harboring a  juvenile
runaway on 28 February 1978, was fined $50 and sentence  was  deferred
for 90 days.  On  16 February 1978, he was  apprehended  on  base  for
speeding.   His  commander   recommended   an   honorable   discharge.
Applicant consulted with legal counsel and on 24 May 1978,  he  waived
his right to present matters to an administrative discharge board  and
declined to submit statements.  The base legal services  reviewed  the
case and found it legally sufficient to support  the  discharge.   The
staff  judge  advocate  recommended  an  honorable  discharge  without
probation  and  rehabilitation  (P&R)  because  of  the  frequency  of
member’s offenses  and  his  negative  response  to  counseling.   The
Discharge Authority reviewed the case, and because  of  the  frequency
and repetitive nature of member’s involvement  in  a  4-month  period,
ordered a general discharge.  He did not approve P&R on account of the
member’s failure to respond to frequent efforts for rehabilitation.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial and states based upon the  documentation
in the file 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 did not submit any new evidence or identify  any  errors
or   injustices   that   occurred   in   the   discharge   processing.
Additionally, he provided  no  facts  warranting  an  upgrade  of  his
discharge.  Accordingly, they recommend his records  remain  the  same
and his request be denied.  He has not filed a timely request.

AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and stated that he was
proud to be an American to  have  served  his  country  overseas.   He
supports the troops and the American Flag and  would  gladly  take  up
arms to protect her.  He would like his children and grandchildren  to
know this and be influenced by it.

He is not asking for any extra benefits from the  Air  Force,  only  a
piece of paper with an honorable discharge  to  hang  proudly  so  his
children and grandchildren can see that he did his part overseas.

He begs the Board to help him  correct  this  difficult  (short)  time
period in his life so that he may move on – proudly.

Applicant’s complete response 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 that failure to timely file.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of an error or injustice warranting an  upgrade  in  his
discharge.   The  records  reflect  that   the   commander   initiated
administrative actions  based  on  information  he  determined  to  be
reliable and that administrative actions were  properly  accomplished.
The  applicant  was  afforded  all  rights  granted  by  statute   and
regulation.  We are not persuaded by the evidence presented  that  the
commander abused his discretionary authority  when  he  initiated  the
discharge action.  The only other basis upon  which  to  recommend  an
upgrade of his discharge would be clemency.   However,  applicant  has
failed  to  provide  documentation  pertaining  to  his  post  service
conduct.   Therefore, in the absence of this documentation, we find no
compelling basis to recommend  granting  the  relief  sought  in  this
application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of a 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 Docket  Number  BC-2003-
02089 in Executive Session on 17 September 2003, under the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Albert F. Lowas, Jr., Panel Chair
                 Mr. Michael J. Maglio, Member
                 Ms. Dorothy P. Loeb, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Jul 03, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, 12 Aug 03.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Aug 03.
      Exhibit E. Applicant’s Response, dated undated




      ALBERT F. LOWAS, JR.
      Panel Chair