RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2000-02321
            INDEX CODE:  110.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  25 JUNE 2005

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was discharged on the grounds that he had failed alcohol  rehabilitation.
 He would like to utilize the Montgomery  G.  I.  Bill  educational  benefit
that he had originally contributed to while in basic training.  He does  not
intend to apply for any additional benefits, but only wants his  educational
benefits reinstated.

Although  his  separation  from  military  service   carried   no   negative
consequence other than his immediate dismissal, nothing  positive  has  ever
come from  his  military  service.   He  faithfully  served  in  Europe  and
participated in Operation Northern  Watch  in  Turkey.   Over  half  of  his
active duty service was performed on foreign ground.

He has been alcohol free since his separation from service.  He has  changed
the order of his life and is more productive  in  relation  to  his  family,
business and community.  He avidly participates in  public  events  and  has
become a well-respected individual in his  community.   He  has  obtained  a
bachelor’s  degree  in  communications.   He  would  like  to  further   his
education by obtaining a master’s degree in  business  administration.   The
Montgomery G. I. Bill would help him and his family in overcoming  financial
obstacles such as tuition costs.

In  support  of  the  application,  the  applicant  submits   his   personal
statement, an Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB)  application,  copies
of  an  enlisted  performance  report  and  his  separation  document.   The
applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 14 August 1996, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air  Force  at  the
age of 19 in the grade of airman basic for a period  of  4  years.   He  was
progressively promoted to the rank of airman first class effective and  with
a date of rank of 28 January 1998.

He received an overall rating  of  “4”  on  his  sole  EPR  for  the  period
14 August 1996 through 13 April 1998.

The  applicant’s  record  of  disciplinary  actions  include  a  letter   of
reprimand dated 26 May 1998, for failure to go; and an Article 15  dated  18
July 1997 for being for drunk and disorderly.  On 2  July  1998,  he  failed
the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Treatment program.

On 4 September 1998, the applicant’s commander  notified  him  that  he  was
recommending his discharge from the Air Force under the provisions  of  AFPD
36-32  and  AFI  36-3208  for  Failure  in  Alcohol  Abuse  Treatment.   The
applicant was advised of his rights, and  after  consulting  military  legal
counsel waived his right to submit a statement on  his  own  behalf.   In  a
legal review of the discharge case file, the staff judge advocate found  the
file legally sufficient and recommended the applicant be discharged  with  a
general discharge  without  probation  and  rehabilitation.   On  16 October
1998, the discharge authority approved the recommendation for discharge  and
directed he be given a general  discharge.   The  applicant  was  discharged
with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge on 26  October  1998.
He had served 2 years, 2 months and 13 days on active  duty,  to  include  1
year, 4 months and 10 days of foreign service.

On 1 October 2000, the applicant submitted  a  similar  appeal  to  the  Air
Force Discharge Review Board  (AFDRB).   On  13  November  2000,  the  AFDRB
determined that  the  discharge  was  consistent  with  the  procedural  and
substantive requirements of the discharge regulation,  and  was  within  the
discretion of the discharge authority.  AFDRB concluded there was  no  legal
or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge (Exhibit B).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ  AFPC/DPPRS  recommends  denial.   DPPRS  states  that   based   on   the
documentation on  file  in  the  master  personnel  records  and  the  AFDRB
proceedings,  the  discharge  was  consistent  with   the   procedural   and
substantive  requirements  of  the  discharge  regulation,  and  within  the
discretion of the discharge authority.  DPPRS concludes  the  applicant  did
not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices  that  occurred
during the discharge process, and provided no facts  warranting  an  upgrade
of his discharge.  DPPRS’s evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the  applicant  for
review and comment on 18 February 2005.  As of this date,  this  office  has
received no response (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided  by  existing  law  or
regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of error or injustice.  Evidence has not been provided that  would
lead us to believe  the  applicant’s  discharge  was  erroneous  or  unjust.
Although the applicant states that  he  has  been  a  productive  member  of
society, he  has  not  provided  evidence  pertaining  to  his  post-service
activities or  showing  he  has  overcome  the  behavior  that  led  to  his
separation.  Additionally, we do not believe a sufficiently  lengthy  period
of time has elapsed since the discharge for the  applicant  to  convincingly
demonstrate he has overcome the traits that led to his  separation,  thereby
warranting the exercise  of  clemency  at  the  present  time.   Should  the
applicant continue to make  a  successful  post-service  adjustment,  as  he
alleges, and provide evidence attesting  to  that  fact  at  a  later  date,
reconsideration of his appeal may be  possible.   In  the  absence  of  such
evidence and based on the circumstances presented in the case at this  time,
we find no basis on which to favorably consider this application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate
the existence of probable 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 28 July 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

           Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
           Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member
           Mr. Terry L. Scott, Member

_________________________________________________________________



The following documentary evidence was considered for AFBCMR  Docket  Number
BC-2000-02321:


     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 25 Jan 05 w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 11 Feb 05.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Feb 05.




                                  KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
                                  Panel Chair