RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-03032
            INDEX NUMBER:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Applicant makes no contentions.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on  3  Mar  71,  for  a
period of four years in the grade of airman first  class.   He  had
prior honorable service in the USMC from 13 Jan 65 thru 10 Jan 69.

On 16 Oct 72, applicant’s squadron commander notified him  that  he
was recommending he be  discharged  from  the  Air  Force  for  his
frequent involvement with civil and  military  authorities  and  an
established pattern of failure to pay just debts.   He  recommended
the  applicant  receive  an  undesirable  discharge  based  on  the
following reasons:  (1) Between Mar 72 and Jun 72, failure  to  pay
just debts to civilian and military authorities  and  admission  of
prior conviction of writing bad checks in the  State  of  Michigan;
(2) On 18 May 72, Article 15 administered for writing checks at the
Base Exchange with  insufficient  funds  in  the  bank;  punishment
imposed consisted of a suspended reduction to the grade  of  airman
basic, and suspended forfeiture of $124.00 pay per  month  for  two
months; (3) On 7 Jun 72, convicted by  Sacramento  Municipal  Court
for passing bad checks; sentence suspended; and (4) On 23  Aug  72,
convicted by Sacramento Municipal Court for forgery  and  sentenced
to six months in the county jail.

On 16 Oct 72, after consulting with counsel, applicant acknowledged
receipt of the discharge notification, that he did  not  waive  his
right to a hearing before an  administrative  discharge  board  and
chose not to submit statements in his own behalf.

On 20 Nov 72, an Administrative Discharge Board (ADB) convened  and
found applicant had been frequently involved with civil or military
authorities in matters of a discreditable nature and had  shown  an
established pattern of dishonorable failure to pay just debts.  The
ADB recommended applicant be discharged because of unfitness with a
general discharge.

The base staff judge  advocate  reviewed  the  case  and  found  it
legally sufficient to support the findings and  recommendations  of
the board and recommended  applicant  receive  an  under  honorable
conditions    (general)    discharge    without    probation    and
rehabilitation.  On 12 Dec 72, the discharge authority approved the
separation and directed a general discharge without  probation  and
rehabilitation.

Applicant was discharged on 15 Dec 72, in the grade of airman first
class, under the provisions of AFM 39-12, by reason  of  unfitness,
with service characterized as under honorable conditions (general).
 He was credited with 1 year, 9  months,  and  10  days  of  active
service during this enlistment includes 189 days of lost  time  due
to civil and pre-trial confinement.

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

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS reviewed this  application  and  recommended  denial.
They stated, in part, that based on the documentation  on  file  in
the master personnel records, the  discharge  was  consistent  with
procedural  and   substantive   requirements   of   the   discharge
regulation.  The applicant did not submit any evidence or  identify
any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.
 Additionally, the applicant provided no 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 8 Oct 04 for review and comment within  30  days.   As  of  this
date, no response has been received by this office.  (Exhibit E)

On 8 Nov 04, a  copy  of  the  FBI  report  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant for review/comment.  At the same time the  applicant  was
invited  to  provide  information   concerning   his   post-service
activities since leaving the service (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 error  or  injustice.   After  careful
consideration of the available evidence, the discharge  appears  to
be in compliance with the governing manuals in effect at  the  time
and we find no evidence to indicate that the applicant’s separation
from the Air Force was inappropriate.  In addition, in view of  the
contents of the FBI Report of Investigation, we are  not  persuaded
that the characterization of the applicant’s discharge warrants  an
upgrade to honorable on the basis of clemency.  Therefore, based on
the available evidence of record, we find no basis  upon  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 Docket Number BC-2004-
03032 in Executive Session on 7 December 2004, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
      Mr. Patrick C. Daugherty, Member
      Mr. James W. Russell III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Sep 04, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  FBI Report of Investigation
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 7 Oct 04.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Oct 04.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 8 Nov 04.




                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair