RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-00074
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  08 JULY 2006

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His under honorable conditions (general) discharge  be  changed.   The
Board could award him the Purple Heart, Bronze Star, Medal  of  Valor,
etc.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The type of  discharge  he  received  was  unjust.   He  is  currently
receiving 100% disability compensation from the Department of Veterans
Affairs (DVA).

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a personal statement and a
partial copy of the DVA Decision Review Officer Decision, dated 4 June
2004.   Applicant's  complete  submission,  with  attachments,  is  at
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on  5  March  1982  for  a
period of four years.  He was progressively promoted to the  grade  of
airman on 17 April 1982 and airman first class on 17 October 1982.  He
received two Airman Performance Reports (APRs) closing  4  March  1984
and 4 March 1983, which overall evaluations were “8,” and “8.”

On 8 March 1984, the applicant’s commander notified him  that  he  was
recommending  he  be  discharged  from  the  Air   Force   for   minor
disciplinary infractions.  The commander recommended applicant receive
an  under  honorable  conditions  (general)  discharge  based  on  the
following:  (1) On 11 January 1984, applicant received an  Article  15
for drinking eight hours prior to duty, incapacitating himself for the
proper performance of his duties.  Punishment consisted  of  reduction
to the grade of airman and forfeiture of $100.00 for one  month.   (2)
On 1 January 1983, applicant was found passed out in front of the base
dining facility due to alcohol consumption.  (3) On 25 December  1983,
applicant reported for duty incapacitated for the  proper  performance
of his duties.  (4) On 15 November 1982, applicant received  a  Letter
of Reprimand (LOR) for failing a dormitory room MEI inspection.

In his recommendation for separation,  the  commander  indicated  that
prior to the initiation of this action, the applicant had been  placed
in the  Alcohol  Rehabilitation  Program  in  February  1983  and  had
successfully completed the program in  April  1983.   Based  on  a  25
December  1983  incident,  he  was  again  placed   in   the   Alcohol
Rehabilitation Program, where he was identified as  a  “K-2  Alcoholic
(Alcohol Abuser).”

Applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification  of  discharge  and
waived his rights to consult with legal counsel and submit  statements
in his own behalf.  The base legal office reviewed the case and  found
it legally sufficient to support separation.  The reviewer recommended
applicant receive an under honorable  conditions  (general)  discharge
without  probation  and  rehabilitation.   The   discharge   authority
approved the separation and directed that applicant be discharged with
an under honorable conditions (general)  discharge  without  probation
and rehabilitation.

Applicant was separated from the Air Force on 12 April 1984 under  the
provisions  of  AFR  39-10,  Administrative   Separation   of   Airmen
(misconduct - pattern of  minor  disciplinary  infractions),  with  an
under honorable conditions (general) discharge.   He  had  served  two
years, one month and two days on active duty.

The DVA rating decision provided by the applicant indicates that, on 4
June 2004, the applicant  was  granted  service  connection  for  post
traumatic stress disorder with an evaluation  of  100%,  effective  19
February 2002.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS states based on the documentation on  file  in  the  master
personnel records, the discharge was consistent  with  the  procedural
and  substantive  requirements  of  the  discharge  regulation.    The
discharge was  within  the  discretion  of  the  discharge  authority.
Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant’s request.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

On 15 April 2005, SAF/MIBR informed the applicant that they  contacted
officials from the Department of Veterans  Affairs  (DVA)  to  receive
copies of his service medical records  but  they  did  not  receive  a
response.  They informed him of the delay and recommended he contact a
DVA representative if he needed assistance.  They  also  informed  him
that his application could not be fully evaluated without the required
records.  However, no response has been received.

A copy of letter, with attachments, attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 29 April 2005, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded  to
the applicant for review and response within  30  days.   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.  Evidence has not been  presented
that would lead us to believe the applicant’s administrative discharge
was erroneous or unjust.  We have noted  the  applicant’s  contentions
concerning alleged sexual assault.  Since we were unable to review the
applicant’s service medical records,  our  review  of  this  case  was
confined to the administrative record.  A review  of  these  documents
finds no substantiation for the applicant’s allegations,  although  it
appears he had a number  of  opportunities  to  raise  the  issues  he
discusses in his application when the various  actions  cited  by  his
commander were being taken.  In cases of this  nature,  regularity  is
presumed in the conduct of Air Force officials  absent  a  showing  of
error or injustice.  Other than his own assertions, we do not find the
evidence provided by the  applicant  sufficient  to  substantiate  his
claims.  We have also reviewed the DVA decision document  provided  by
the applicant and do not find it supports a  change  to  his  military
records since this decision was dated more than  20  years  after  his
discharge and it appears  the  decision  was  made  based  largely  on
statements made by the applicant after leaving the service.   In  view
of the  above  and  absent  evidence  by  the  applicant  showing  the
information in his discharge case file is erroneous,  his  substantial
rights were violated, or his  commanders  abused  their  discretionary
authority, the applicant’s request for a change to  his  discharge  is
not favorably considered.

4.  We have noted the applicant’s apparent request for various awards.
 However, he has provided no evidence showing any act(s) on  his  part
met the criteria for the requested awards or that recommendations  for
the awards were submitted and improperly disapproved.  Therefore,  his
request in this regard is denied.

_________________________________________________________________

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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 30 June 2005, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                 Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Terry L. Scott, Member
                 Ms. Kathy L. Boockholdt, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket  Number
BC-2005-00074 was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 Jan 05, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 28 Apr 05.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 15 Apr 05, w/atchs.
      Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Apr 05.




                             LAURENCE M. GRONER
                             Panel Chair