ADDENDUM TO
                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-00228
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  22 JULY 2006

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

In the applicant’s request for  reconsideration,  he  requests  his  general
(under  honorable  conditions)  discharge  be  upgraded  to   an   honorable
discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He desires an upgrade of his discharge.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 24 January 1969, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force  in  the
grade of airman basic for a period of four years.

On 28 September 1971, the applicant was notified of his  commander's  intent
to initiate discharge action against him for  Unsuitability.   The  specific
reasons follow:

        a.  On 28 March 1971, he operated a motor vehicle  while  under  the
influence of alcohol.  He was arrested at 0215 hours  and  confined  in  the
State jail, Fairbanks, Alaska.  He was arraigned at 0930 hours in the  Civil
Court of Fairbanks and found guilty of driving while  under  the  influence.
He was fined $300.00 with $150.00 being suspended.

        b.  On 7 April 1971, he was given a Letter of  Reprimand  (LOR)  for
conduct prejudicial to the standards expected of a Non-Commissioned  Officer
(NCO).  His name was also placed on the Airman Control Roster.  Due  to  the
incident on 28 March 1971, he was  scheduled  to  attend  Remedial  Driver’s
Training.

        c. On 12 April 1971, his base driving privileges were suspended  for
six months due to the incident on 28 March 1971.

        d.  On 30 May 1971, he was observed  and  cited  for  operating  his
privately owned vehicle on base while  his  driving  privileges  were  under
suspension.  For this offense, his driving  privileges  were  suspended  for
two years.

        e.  On 7 July 1971, he was reported as being disorderly  in  station
and was given an LOR.

        f.   On  22  August  1971,  he  was  reported  as  being  drunk  and
disorderly on station and he resisted being lawfully apprehended.  For  this
offense he was administered an Article 15, Uniform Code of Military  Justice
(UCMJ).

        g.  On 24 August, 8 September, and 13 September 1971,  he  underwent
a psychiatric  evaluation  at  Eielson  AFB.   He  was  further  tested  and
evaluated on 9 September 1971 at Bassett  Army  Hospital,  Fort  Wainwright,
Alaska.  Results of the evaluations indicated the applicant had a  character
and behavior disorder  defined  as  an  “antisocial  personality  disorder.”
Recommendations by the  psychiatrists  were  for  administrative  separation
from the Air Force.

        h.  On 15 September 1971, he was operating  a  motor  vehicle  under
the influence of alcohol and he assaulted a State law  enforcement  officer.
He was arraigned on 16 September 1971 in the Civil Court of  Fairbanks.   He
pleaded guilty on both offenses and was ordered to be confined for  10  days
on each count.

The commander indicated in his recommendation for discharge action that  the
applicant  was  not  recommended  for  probation   and   rehabilitation   in
accordance with Chapter 4, AFM 39-12.  He had not demonstrated a  motivation
for military service and the commander  felt  the  applicant  could  not  be
developed to the extent  of  absorbing  military  training  and  becoming  a
satisfactory  airman.   Two  competent  psychiatrists   recommended   prompt
administrative separation.

The commander  advised  the  applicant  that  an  evaluation  officer  would
personally interview him and counsel him regarding his case.   He  was  also
given the opportunity to submit a rebuttal and make statements  in  his  own
behalf.

After consulting with counsel, the applicant  waived  his  right  to  submit
statements in his own behalf.




On 1 October 1971, the  Evaluation  Officer  recommended  the  applicant  be
separated from the Air Force with a general discharge as soon as possible.

On 5 October 1971,  the  Assistant  Staff  Judge  Advocate  recommended  the
applicant be discharged from the Air Force with a  general  discharge  under
the provisions of Chapter 2, Section A, Paragraph 2-4b, AFM  39-12,  without
rehabilitation.

On 6 October 1971, the discharge authority approved the applicant’s  general
discharge.

The applicant was discharged on 15 October 1971,  in  the  grade  of  airman
first class with a general (under  honorable  conditions)  discharge,  under
the provisions of AFM 39-12 (Unsuitability).  He served 2 years,  8  months,
and 22 days of total active military service with 10 days of lost time.

On 15 June 1973, the Air Force Discharge  Review  Board  (AFDRB)  considered
and denied  the  applicant’s  request  that  his  general  (under  honorable
conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge (Exhibit B).

On 11 July 1973, the Air Force Board  for  Correction  of  Military  Records
(AFBCMR) denied the applicant’s request that his  general  (under  honorable
conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge (Exhibit B).

On 20 October 1982, the AFBCMR staff determined the applicant’s request  for
reconsideration to upgrade his discharge did not meet the  requirements  for
reconsideration.

Pursuant to the  Board's  request,  the  Federal  Bureau  of  Investigation,
Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an arrest record which is at Exhibit C.

On 3 March 2005, the Board  staff  requested  the  applicant  provide  post-
service documentation within 20 days (Exhibit  D).   As  of  this  date,  no
response has been received by this office.

On 22 March 2005, the applicant was provided the opportunity to  respond  to
the FBI investigation within 20 days (Exhibit  E).   As  of  this  date,  no
response has been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to  demonstrate  the
existence of an  error  or  injustice  warranting  the  applicant’s  general
(under  honorable  conditions)  discharge  be  upgraded  to   an   honorable
discharge.  The Board believes  responsible  officials  applied  appropriate
standards  in  effecting  the  separation,  and  the  Board  does  not  find
persuasive evidence that pertinent regulations were  violated  or  that  the
applicant was not afforded all the rights to which entitled at the  time  of
discharge.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we  again
find  no  compelling  basis  to  change  our  previous  decision   in   this
application.

2.    Although the applicant  did  not  specifically  request  consideration
based  on  clemency,  we  also  find  insufficient  evidence  to  warrant  a
recommendation the discharge be upgraded on that basis.   In  this  respect,
we note  the  applicant’s  continued  misconduct  following  his  discharge.
Further, when given the opportunity to  provide  information  regarding  his
post-service activities and accomplishments, he failed to do so.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or injustice; the application  was  denied  without  a
personal appearance; and 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-
00228 in Executive Session on 19 May 2005, under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:

                  Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
                  Ms. Dorothy P. Loeb, Member
                  Ms. Marcia Jane Bachman, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 11 January 2005.
   Exhibit B.  Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  FBI Report.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 3 March 2005.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 22 March 2005.




                       RICHARD A. PETERSON
                       Panel Chair