RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00355
                       INDEX CODE:  110.00
                       COUNSEL:  None

                       HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was an excellent soldier until he made the mistake of not reporting
an airman who stole a television.  He is very sorry for  what  he  did
and if he could change it he would.  He is now married  with  children
and has been working at the  same  job  for  11  years.   He  believes
everyone deserves a second chance.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on  24  July  1987  for  a
period of four years as an airman basic.

On 2 March 1989, the applicant's commander notified the applicant he
was being recommended for a discharge for misconduct.  The commander
cited the following reason for the discharge:

      On 21 December 1988, the applicant received an Article 15  for
assisting another servicemember in stealing a television.  For  this
misconduct, his punishment consisted of reduction to  the  grade  of
airman  basic  with  a  new  date  of  rank  of  21  December  1988.
Forfeiture of $150.00 of pay per month  for  two  months  (suspended
until 20 June 1989, at which  time  it  would  be  remitted  without
further action unless sooner vacated), and 45 days of extra  duties.
On 3 February 1989, the commander set aside the reduction below  the
grade of airman.

The commander advised the applicant of  his  right  to  consult  legal
counsel and that legal counsel had been obtained to assist him; and to
submit statements in his own behalf, or waive the above  rights  after
consulting with counsel.

The commander indicated in his  recommendation  for  discharge  action
that he directed the First Sergeant to stay abreast of the applicant’s
affairs,  morale,  and  accomplishments  of  his  duties.   The  First
Sergeant had to counsel the applicant on  six  occasions  for  various
performance problems.  During one counseling session, the  applicant’s
spouse attended  for  clarification  of  circumstances  and  rationale
leading to  disciplinary  action  under  Article  15.   His  commander
further stated the applicant  committed  a  serious  crime  as  a  law
enforcement specialist.  As a result of his action, he had permanently
damaged his ability  to  perform  police  duties  with  expertise  and
integrity.  He further recommended the applicant be discharged with an
under honorable condition (general) discharge  without  probation  and
rehabilitation.

On 7 March 1989, after consulting with  counsel,  applicant  invoked
his right to submit a statement.

On 16 March 1989, a legal review was  conducted  in  which  the  staff
judge advocate (SJA) recommended the applicant be discharged  with  an
under honorable conditions (general) discharge without  probation  and
rehabilitation.

Applicant was discharged on 24 March 1989, in the  grade  of  airman
with  an  under  honorable  conditions   (general)   discharge,   in
accordance with AFR 39-10 (Misconduct).  He served a  total  of  two
years, eight months and one day of active service.

Applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board  (DRB)  in
April 1990 to have his under honorable conditions (general) discharge
upgraded to honorable.  The AFDRB, on 16  October  1990,  denied  the
applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of investigation,
Washington, D.C., indicated on the basis of the data  furnished  they
were unable to locate an arrest record (Exhibit C).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS states the applicant has not  submitted  any  evidence  nor
identified any errors or injustices that occurred in the processing of
his discharge.  Based upon the documentation in the applicant's  file,
they believe his discharge was  consistent  with  the  procedural  and
substantive requirements of the discharge regulations  of  that  time.
Also, the discharge was within the sound discretion of  the  discharge
authority.  He also did not provide any facts to warrant an upgrade of
his discharge.  Furthermore, an appeal to have his discharge  upgraded
was considered and denied by the AFDRB.  Based on the information  and
evidence provided they recommend the  applicant's  request  be  denied
(Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the  applicant  on
19 March 2004, for review and response.  As of this date, no  response
has been received by this office.

On  13  May  2004,  the  Board   requested   the   applicant   provide
documentation on his post-service activities (Exhibit F).

The applicant states he was young and was influenced by  his  roommate
and was not thinking of all the consequences of his  actions.   He  is
very sorry for what he did.  Since leaving the military he has lead  a
pretty clean life.  He has held  a  steady  job  and  is  involved  in
activities within his community.

Applicant’s  complete  response,  with  attachments,  is  attached  at
Exhibit G.

_________________________________________________________________

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 of timely file.

3.    After a thorough review of the evidence  of  record  we  see  no
evidence to show that  the  applicant’s  discharge  was  erroneous  or
unjust.  However, the Board  recognizes  the  adverse  impact  of  the
discharge  the  applicant  received;  and  while  it  may  have   been
appropriate at the time, the Board believes it would be  an  injustice
for the  applicant  to  continue  to  suffer  from  its  effects.   In
consideration of the applicant’s  apparent  successful  transition  to
civilian life,  and  no  evidence  that  he  has  had  any  subsequent
involvement of a derogatory nature since his separation from  the  Air
Force, the Board believes that corrective action is appropriate on the
basis of clemency.  Accordingly, we recommend his records be corrected
to the extent indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 24 March  1989,  he
was  honorably  discharged  and  furnished  an   Honorable   Discharge
certificate.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2004-00355 in Executive Session on 5 May 2004 and 21 June 2004,  under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member
                 Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member

All members  voted  to  correct  the  records,  as  recommended.   The
following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Jan 04, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Available Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. FBI Report.
      Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 16 Mar 04.
      Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Mar 04.
      Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 13 May 04.
      Exhibit G. Letter, applicant, dated 20 May 04.




                                        DAVID C. VAN GASBECK
                                        Panel Chair






AFBCMR BC-2004-00355





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 24
March 1989, he was honorably discharged and furnished an Honorable
Discharge certificate.




                             JOE G. LINEBERGER
                             Director
                             Air Force Review Boards Agency