RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02768
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  Under  Other  Than  Honorable  Conditions  (UOTHC)  discharge  be
upgraded to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Upgrading his discharge would assist him in his new way of life.

The  applicant  provided  no  documents  in  support  of  the  appeal.
Applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 6 January  1987  for  a
period of six years.  He was progressively promoted to  the  grade  of
airman first class (E-3), effective and with a  date  of  rank  of  20
February 1987.  He received  two  Airman  Performance  Reports  (APRs)
closing 5 January 1988 and 7  November  1988,  in  which  the  overall
evaluations were “7” and “6.”

Applicant received an Article 15 on 9 October 1987,  for  being  drunk
and disorderly, and, striking two  individuals  in  the  face  with  a
bottle.  Punishment consisted of reduction to airman and forfeiture of
$100 per month for two months.  On 15 October 1987, the  reduction  to
the grade of airman was suspended until 14 April 1988, at which  time,
unless sooner vacated, it would be remitted  without  further  action.
On  24  February  1988,  the  suspended  portion  of  the   punishment
pertaining  to  reduction  in  grade  was   vacated   based   on   the
determination that the applicant had been  disorderly  on  6  February
1988.  He received another Article 15 on 10 March 1988 for failure  to
go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty.   Punishment
consisted of a reduction in grade to airman basic and 14 days of extra
duty.

The discharge case file in the applicant’s record is incomplete.   The
available records indicate that court-martial  charges  were  referred
against the applicant based on allegations  that,  on  or  between  29
December 1987 and 2 January 1988, he  had  wrongfully  conspired  with
another Air Force member to commit larceny, that he  unlawfully  broke
into and entered a room of another Air Force  member  with  intent  to
commit larceny, and that he did commit  larceny  by  stealing  various
items of  personal  property  belonging  to  another  military  member
exceeding a value of $1,000.  On  7 November  1988,  after  consulting
counsel, the applicant requested discharge in lieu of trial by  court-
martial.  His commander recommended that his request be  approved  and
that he be discharged with an under other  than  honorable  conditions
discharge without the offer of probation  and  rehabilitation.   In  a
legal review of the discharge case file, dated  28  November  1988,  a
deputy staff judge advocate found the file was in compliance with  the
applicable laws and directives and recommended  that  the  commander’s
recommendation be  approved.   On  29  November  1988,  the  discharge
authority approved the applicant’s request and  directed  that  he  be
discharged with an under other than honorable conditions discharge.

The applicant was discharged from the Air Force on  14  December  1988
under the provisions of AFR 39-10 (request for discharge  in  lieu  of
trial by court-martial) with an under other than honorable  conditions
(UOTHC) discharge.  He served one year, eleven months and nine days of
total active service.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of  Investigation,
Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative report, which  is
attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRSP states that they believe the discharge was consistent with
the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements   of   the   discharge
regulation.   Additionally,  the  discharge  was  within   the   sound
discretion of the  discharge  authority.   Therefore,  they  recommend
denial of applicant’s request.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 17 October 2003, a copy of the Air Force evaluation  was  forwarded
to the applicant for review and response within 30 days.  As  of  this
date, this office has received no response.

On 24 November 2003, a copy of the  Federal  Bureau  of  Investigation
(FBI) Report was forwarded to the applicant for  review  and  response
within 14 days.   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.   We  took  notice  of   the
applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case;
however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force
and adopt their rationale as the basis for  the  conclusion  that  the
applicant  has  not  been  the  victim  of  an  error  or   injustice.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to  the  contrary,  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 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 January 2004, under the provisions of AFI  36-
2603:

                       Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Panel Chair
                       Mr. Charlie E. Williams, Jr., Member
                       Ms. Ann-Cecile McDermott, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Aug 03.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. FBI Report.
      Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRSP, dated 7 Oct 03.
      Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Oct 03.
      Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 24 Nov 03, w/o atch.




                             ROSCOE HINTON, JR.
                             Panel Chair