RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-01381
            INDEX CODE:  110.02

      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED: NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was given a general discharge due to sharing an apartment with a
roommate who was arrested for drug possession.  He was not given  a
test to verify that he was not a drug  abuser;  he  was  discharged
just because he was living with him.  He was not a drug user and no
charges were ever pressed against him.

Since his discharge he has been married  for  34  years,  raised  a
family, and has worked continuously.  He  has  had  no  infractions
with the law since his discharge and he served our  nation  proudly
in Viet Nam.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 6 Dec 67, applicant enlisted in the Regular  Air  Force  in  the
grade of airman basic for a period of four  years.   Prior  to  the
events under review, he was promoted to the grade of sergeant  with
an effective date and date of rank of 1 Jan 70.  He was awarded the
Purple Heart Medal and the Air Force Good Conduct Medal during this
enlistment.  He reenlisted on 26 May 71 for a period of four years.


On 22 Jul 71, applicant received a letter of counseling for failing
to report on time.

On 27 Apr 72 and 1 May 72, he received letters  of  counseling  for
non-compliance with AFR 35-10 standards.

On 11 May  72,  applicant  received  a  record  of  counseling  for
frequent failure to report on time.

On 11 Aug 72, he received  a  letter  of  counseling  concerning  a
delinquent account.

On 5 and 6 Sep  72,  his  section  received  two  letters  from  HQ
AAVS/DOPT regarding applicant’s unacceptable behavior.

On 30 Oct and 2 Nov 72, he received letters of reprimand for having
an improper haircut.

On 31 Oct 72, he  received  a  letter  of  counseling  for  haircut
standards.

On 21 Nov 72, he was convicted by a civil court for  possession  of
marijuana on 28 Sep 72.  He was placed on two  years  of  probation
and fined $250.

On 8  Dec  72,  the  squadron  commander  initiated  administrative
discharge action against the applicant  due  to  apathy,  defective
attitude  and  inability  to  expend  effort  constructively.   The
specific reasons were based on the incidents cited above.  On  that
same  date,  applicant  acknowledged  receipt  of   the   discharge
notification and that military counsel was available  to  him.   On
11 Dec 72, he waived his right to appear before  an  administrative
discharge board and to submit statements in  his  own  behalf.   On
20 Dec 72, the group Staff Judge Advocate found  the  case  legally
sufficient  for  a  general  discharge,   without   probation   and
rehabilitation (P&R).   On  22  Dec  72,  the  discharge  authority
directed the applicant be discharged without P&R, and  that  he  be
issued a DD Form 257AF, General Discharge Certificate.

On 26 Dec 72, applicant was  discharged  under  the  provisions  of
AFM 39-12, with service characterized as general  (under  honorable
conditions).  He was credited with 5 years and 21  days  of  active
duty service (excludes 3 days of lost time due  to  confinement  in
civilian jail).

Pursuant  to  the  Board’s   request,   the   Federal   Bureau   of
Investigation, Clarksburg, WV, indicated on 31 July 2003, that,  on
the basis of data furnished, they are unable to  locate  an  arrest
record (Exhibit C).

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommended applicant’s request be denied.  Based  on
available documentation in  the  file,  they  found  the  discharge
consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of  the
discharge regulation.  Additionally, the discharge was  within  the
sound discretion of  the  discharge  authority.   They  also  noted
applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or
injustices that occurred in the discharge processing  and  provided
no other facts warranting a change to his character of service.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  the  applicant
on 28 May 04 for review and comment within 30  days.   As  of  this
date, no response has been received by this office (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 error  or  injustice.   The  discharge
appears to be in compliance with the governing manuals and we  find
no evidence to indicate that his separation from the Air Force  was
inappropriate.  We find no evidence of error in this case and after
thoroughly reviewing the documentation that has been  submitted  in
support of applicant's appeal, we do not believe  he  has  suffered
from an injustice.  Therefore, based on the available  evidence  of
record, we find no basis upon  which  to  favorably  consider  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 AFBCMR Docket  Number
BC-2004-01381 in Executive Session on 1 September 2004,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
      Mr. John E. B. Smith, Member
      Ms. Kathy L. Boockholdt, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 Apr 04.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  FBI Report of Investigation, dated 6 Aug 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 18 May 04.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 May 04.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair