RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-00056
            INDEX CODE:  110.02

      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED: NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  8 May 2006


___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He requested an early out for hardship  reasons  and  believes  the
narrative code of 39-12 was entered in error.  He states  the  code
should have been 39-10.

He was told at the time, that a general was the discharge given for
an early out only to discover after 30 years that was not the case.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force  on  2  Oct  69  for  a
period of four years in the grade of  airman  basic.   His  highest
grade held was sergeant (Sgt/E-4).

On 3 Dec 70, applicant received Article 15 punishment  for  failure
to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, on  or
about 30 Nov 70.  His punishment consisted of a suspended reduction
in grade to the rank of airman for three months (3 Mar 71).

A resume of applicant’s airman performance  reports  (APR)  profile
follows:

            PERIOD CLOSING              OVERALL EVALUATION


           12 Oct 70                                    5
                 12 Apr 71                                    9
                 12 Oct 71                                    6
                 12 Apr 72                                    8
                 05 Feb 73                                    4

On 26 Feb 73, applicant received a medical  evaluation  stating  he
had no physical or mental conditions  warranting  separation  under
the provisions of AFM 35-4.

On 27 Feb 73,  the  commander  initiated  administrative  discharge
action  against  the  applicant  because  he  displayed   financial
irresponsibility.  The commander counseled applicant  on  at  least
five different occasions regarding his receipt of  several  letters
of indebtedness.  These debts  were  incurred  over  a  substantial
period of time, and the applicant consistently failed to  discharge
his obligations in a responsible  fashion.   Applicant’s  file  was
replete  with  evidence  of  efforts  to  counsel  him  as  to  his
obligations, and all such counseling efforts were to no avail.

On  that  same  date,  applicant  acknowledged   receipt   of   the
administrative discharge notification  and  after  consulting  with
counsel, he waived his right to a hearing before an  administrative
discharge board and submitted statements in  his  own  behalf.   He
attributed his indebtedness to obligations incurred  prior  to  his
entry in the Air Force and to his  decrease  in  income  since  his
enlistment.  He requested that his commander consider an  honorable
discharge rather  than  general  under  honorable  conditions.   On
28 Feb 73, the staff judge advocate found  the  case  file  legally
sufficient and concurred with the commander’s  recommendation  that
the applicant  be  separated  with  a  general  discharge,  without
probation or rehabilitation.  On 2 Mar 73, the discharge  authority
approved the discharge and directed the applicant be  issued  a  DD
Form 257AF, General Discharge Certificate.

On 2 Mar 73, applicant  was  discharged  under  the  provisions  of
AFM 39-12,  with   service   characterized   as   under   honorable
conditions.  He was credited with 3 years, 4 months, and 1  day  of
active duty service.

On 21  Jul  82,  the  Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Board  (AFDRB)
considered and denied the applicant’s request for  upgrade  of  his
general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable.   They
concluded that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and
substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within
the discretion of the discharge authority and  that  the  applicant
was provided full administrative due  process  (see  AFDRB  Hearing
Record at Exhibit B).

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

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS reviewed this  application  and  recommended  denial.
They found that the discharge was consistent  with  the  procedural
and  substantive  requirements   of   the   discharge   regulation.
Additionally, that the discharge was within the sound discretion of
the discharge authority.  They also noted that  the  applicant  did
not submit any new evidence or identify any  errors  or  injustices
that occurred in the discharge processing, nor did he  provide  any
facts warranting an upgrade of his  discharge.   Accordingly,  they
recommended his records remain the same.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit D.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

By letter, dated 31  Jan  05,  applicant  submitted  statements  to
clarify the events surrounding  his  discharge.   Additionally,  he
believes since his discharge was  for  financial  irresponsibility,
continued denial to upgrade his discharge after 30 years is neither
moral nor fair (Exhibit F).

On 5 April 2005, a copy of the FBI  report  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant for comment.   At  that  time,  the  applicant  was  also
invited to provide additional evidence pertaining to his activities
since leaving the  service  (Exhibit  G).   As  of  this  date,  no
response has been received by this office.

___________________________________________________________________

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 regulations  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.  In addition, based on his  overall
record of service, the contents of the FBI Report of Investigation,
and the absence of evidence related to his post-service  activities
and accomplishments, we are not persuaded that an  upgrade  of  the
characterization of his discharge is  warranted  on  the  basis  of
clemency.

___________________________________________________________________

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-2005-00056 in Executive  Session  on  10  May  2005,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Ms. Cathlynn B. Sparks, Panel Chair
      Mr. Patrick B. Daugherty, Member
      Ms. Marcia Jane Bachman, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Jan 05.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  FBI Report of Investigation.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 19 Jan 05.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Jan 05.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 31 Jan 05.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 5 Apr 05, w/atchs.




                                   CATHLYNN B. SPARKS
                                   Panel Chair