RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00235
            INDEX CODE:  110.00


            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His under honorable conditions  (general)  discharge  be  upgraded  to
honorable and his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

There was no error.  However, he is asking  for  a  second  chance  at
doing better for himself and his dependents.

In  support  of  the  appeal,  applicant   submits   three   character
references.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on  5  March  1980  for  a
period of four years.  He was progressively promoted to the  grade  of
airman (E-2) on 3 September 1980 and the grade of Airman  First  Class
(E-3) on 3 March 1981.  He received  two  Airman  Performance  Reports
(APRs) closing 8 April 1981 and 3 September 1981,  which  the  overall
evaluations were “8” and “7.”

On 19 October 1981, applicant’s commander notified  him  that  he  was
recommending  his  discharge  for  apathy,  defective   attitude   and
inability to expend effort constructively.  Basis for the action:   On
19 March 1981, a Record of Counseling (ROC)  for  departing  his  duty
station without permission.  On 24 March 1981, a ROC for lying to  his
supervisor to obtain time off.  On 11 May 1981, a ROC  for  cashing  a
check with insufficient funds in his account.  On 1 September 1981,  a
Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for cashing six checks which were dishonored
and  returned  for  insufficient  funds.   On  10 September  1981,   a
dishonored check notification for writing a  check  with  insufficient
funds to cover the amount of the check.  On 15 September 1981,  a  ROC
for failing to comply with an order to update his section locator.  On
30 September 1981, an Article 15 for absenting himself from his  place
of duty without authority, from 16  September  1981  to  18  September
1981, and failing to go to his place of duty  on  14  September  1981.
Punishment consisted of a reduction  in  grade  to  airman  (E-2)  and
forfeiture of $100.  On 10 November 1981, an Article 15 for failing to
go to his place of duty at the  appointed  time  on  5 November  1981.
Punishment consisted of forfeiture of $100.   The  base  legal  office
reviewed the case and found  it  legally  sufficient  to  support  the
discharge and recommended  an  under  honorable  conditions  (general)
discharge without probation and rehabilitation (P&R).   The  discharge
authority approved the  separation  and  ordered  an  under  honorable
conditions (general) discharge without P&R.

The applicant was discharged from the Air Force on  11  December  1981
under the provisions  of  AFM  39-12,  Separation  for  Unsuitability,
Misconduct, Resignation, or Request for Discharge for the Good of  the
Service and Procedures for the Rehabilitation Program (unsuitability -
apathy, defective attitude) and received an under honorable conditions
(general) discharge.  He served one year, nine months and  seven  days
on active duty.

Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of  Investigation,
Clarksburg, WV, indicated on the basis of the data furnished they were
unable to locate an arrest record, which is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

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

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states that he makes no excuses nor does he deny any of  the
facts concerning his general discharge.  He is asking for  forgiveness
and another chance.  He explains  he  had  a  severe  drug  dependency
problem from 1978 until 1990.  During this time he failed to  see  the
value of the military, education, family, and life itself.  He  wishes
he could take back those years he caused so much pain.  Since 1990  he
has become a productive part  of  our  wonderful  society.   His  wife
struggled with him through the bad times and today  she  is  glad  she
did.  They have four productive children and  24  years  of  marriage.
While in Basic Training he received the Trainee  of  the  Week  Award.
The pride and discipline he showed to win this award  is  the  way  he
lives today.  Thanks to the  Air  Force  he  works  as  an  Electronic
Maintenance Engineer.  He can not take back his awful past but with an
honorable discharge he would continue his education, making better the
future.  This would be the best amends he could  make.   He  would  be
better for himself, family and our country.  He loves electronics  and
desires to design some awesome technologies.  He has already  designed
application specific circuits and with added education he will be able
to take his design work to the next level, building upon the education
the Air Force gave him.  He is asking for the opportunity  to  do  now
what he did not understand in the past.  He wants to become  a  useful
part of our society.  He asks that he please be forgiven for the wrong
he has done.

Applicant's complete response, with attachment, is at Exhibit 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.   After  reviewing  the
evidence presented, we are not persuaded that the applicant’s  records
are in error or that he has been the  victim  of  an  injustice.   The
applicant requests his discharge be upgraded  based  on  the  clemency
consideration of a successful  post  service  adjustment.   While  the
applicant has provided some evidence  to  support  his  assertion,  on
balance, we do not believe that clemency is warranted  at  this  time.
Our findings in this matter are based on the short period of time  the
applicant served, the seriousness and multiplicity of his  infractions
against the good order and discipline of the service, and the  paucity
of evidence he has provided concerning his  post  service  activities.
In the absence of more expansive evidence showing that  the  applicant
has maintained the standards of good citizenship and has been a useful
and productive member of society over an extended period of  time,  we
find no basis on which to favorably consider his request.

_________________________________________________________________

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 6 May 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:


                 Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Deborah A. Erickson, Member
                 Ms. Sharon B. Seymour, Member

The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket  Number  BC-2004-
00235 was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 22 Jan 04, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. FBI Report.
      Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 9 Mar 04.
      Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Mar 04.
      Exhibit F. Applicant’s Response, dated 20 Mar 04.





                             LAURENCE M. GRONER
                             Panel Chair