RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02506
            INDEX CODE:  110.02
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was 18 years old when he entered  military  service  and  experienced  so
many problems.  Both his parents became critically  ill  and  died,  and  he
went through a divorce.  He  was  going  through  a  lot  of  hardships  and
personal problems and could not keep his military perspective.  He  received
an assignment to Turkey, but was determined not to go.  His  assignment  was
cancelled because of emotional reasons.  He was not happy and wanted to  get
out of the service to take care of family business.   He  was  approved  for
discharge  because  of  his  problems,  but  was  not  given  an   honorable
discharge.

Since he has left the Air Force, he has been successful in many things.   He
has been married for 19 years and  owns  his  own  home.   He  had  his  own
business for 8 years, and has been a DoD employee for 18 years and is  doing
his best to help the soldiers succeed in their  mission.   He  has  received
many awards for his civilian service.  He has not been in any  trouble  with
the law.

No  supporting  documentation  was  submitted.   The  applicant's   complete
submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 22 April 1977, the applicant enlisted in the Regular  Air  Force  at  the
age of 18 in the grade airman basic (E-1) for a period of 4 years.   He  was
progressively promoted to the grade of airman first  class  (E-3)  effective
and with a date of rank of  22 April  1978.   The  applicant  received  four
Airman Performance Reports (APRs), in which the overall evaluations were  8,
8, 9 and 5.

21 August 1979, the applicant was counseled for failing to  provide  support
to his wife.  He was required to immediately pay  $103.00,  and  set  up  an
allotment.

On 21 September 1979, based on previous ongoing evaluation of the  applicant
by personnel at the Mental Health Clinic, the Chief,  Mental  Health  Clinic
initiated  a  Medial  Statement  in  which  he  indicated   the   diagnostic
impression  was  “Depressive  neurosis,   chronic,   moderate   to   severe,
superimposed on  a  personality  disorder.   It  was  recommended  that  the
applicant be returned to duty and continue in psychotherapy.

On 9 October 1979, the applicant received a Letter of  Counseling  regarding
his job performance.

On 19 October 1979, the applicant was counseled regarding his  then  pending
Permanent Change of Station assignment.

On 22 October  1979,  the  applicant  received  Article  15  punishment  for
failing to report for a scheduled PCS briefing.

On 25 October 1979, action was taken to cancel  the  applicant’s  assignment
in order to initiate administrative discharge proceedings.

On 31 October 1979, the applicant  was  reprimanded  for  twice  failing  to
maintain his on-base quarters in a satisfactory manner.

On  21  November  1979,  the  applicant’s  commander  notified  him  he  was
recommending that he be discharged from  the  Air  Force  under  AFM  39-12,
Chapter 2, Section A for unsuitability.   After  consulting  military  legal
counsel, the applicant declined to submit  statements  on  his  behalf,  but
offered  a  conditional  waiver   of   the   rights   associated   with   an
administrative discharge hearing contingent upon  his  receipt  of  no  less
than a General Discharge certificate.

On 11 December 1979, a legal review of the discharge case file by the  staff
judge advocate  found  the  file  legally  sufficient  and  recommended  the
applicant be discharged with a general  discharge  without  the  opportunity
for probation  and  rehabilitation.   On  14 December  1979,  the  discharge
authority approved the recommendation  for  discharge  and  directed  he  be
issued  a  General  Discharge  certificate  without  the   opportunity   for
probation or rehabilitation.

On 17 December 1979, he was discharged under honorable conditions under  the
provisions of AFR 39-12 (Unsuitable - Personality Disorder).  He had  served
2 years, 7 months, and 26 days on active duty.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of  Investigation  (FBI)
provided a copy of an  investigative  report  pertaining  to  the  applicant
(Identification Record No. 373615P7, which is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states based  on  the  documentation
on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was  consistent  with
procedural and substantive requirements of  the  discharge  regulation,  and
the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge  authority.   DPPRS
notes the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify  any  errors  or
injustices that occurred in the discharge processing,  nor  did  he  provide
any  facts  warranting  a  change  to  his  character  of  service.    DPPRS
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 27 August 2004.  On 14 September 2004,  the  applicant
was  invited  to  submit  information   pertaining   to   his   post-service
accomplishments.  On 21 September 2004, a copy  of  the  Federal  Bureau  of
Investigations (FBI) report was forwarded to  the  applicant.   As  of  this
date, this office has received no response to any  of  the  before-mentioned
correspondence (Exhibit D).
_________________________________________________________________

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
applicant’s request  and  the  available  evidence  of  record,  we  see  no
evidence that would warrant  an  upgrade  of  his  discharge  to  honorable.
Other than his own assertions, the applicant has provided no  evidence  that
would lead us to believe the actions taken  to  effect  his  discharge  were
improper, or that the information in his discharge case file  is  erroneous.
Additionally, the applicant has not  provided  evidence  pertaining  to  his
post-service activities and accomplishments to  support  possible  favorable
consideration of his request based on clemency.   Should  applicant  provide
statements from community leaders and acquaintances attesting  to  his  good
character and reputation  and  other  evidence  of  successful  post-service
rehabilitation, we would be willing  to  reconsider  his  request.   In  the
absence of such evidence or showing his discharge was  erroneous  or  unjust
at the time he was  effected,  we  have  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

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in  Executive
Session on 1 March 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Charles E. Bennett, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Carolyn B. Willis, Panel Member
                 Ms. Jan Mulligan, Panel Member


The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with  Docket
Number BC-2004-02506:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 Sep 04.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 4 Oct 04.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Aug 04 and letters,
                 AFBCMR, dated 14 Sep 04 and 21 Sep 04.
      Exhibit E.  FBI Report.



            CHARLES E. BENNETT
            Panel Chair