RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-01698
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  27 NOVEMBER 2006

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

During the period he was in the Air Force he suffered a severe  mental
disorder.

Applicant does not submit any documentation in support of the appeal.

Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 10 March  1999  in  the
grade of airman basic for a period of six years.   His  highest  grade
held was  senior  airman.   He  received  three  Enlisted  Performance
Reports (EPRs) closing 15 October 2000, 15 October 2001 and 15 October
2002 in which the overall evaluations were “4,” “3,” and “2.”

On 8 January 2003, applicant’s commander  notified  him  that  he  was
recommending discharge from  the  Air  Force  for  minor  disciplinary
infractions.  The commander  was  recommending  applicant  receive  an
under honorable conditions (general) discharge based on the following:
 (1) On or about 28 April 2000, he receive a Letter of Counseling  for
failure to report to his appointed place of duty at the required time.
 (2) On or about 27 June 2000, he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR)
for reporting to work 36 minutes past the appointed time.  (3)  On  or
about 1 December 2000, he received an LOR for  failure  to  report  to
duty.  (4) On or about 16 February  2001,  he  received  a  Record  of
Individual Counseling for failure to perform  duties  as  required  by
technical orders relating to the assigned task.  (5) On  or  about  26
February 2001, he received  a  Record  of  Individual  Counseling  for
failure to show for an open ranks inspection due to the  fact  he  was
late for duty.  (6) On or about 25 May 2001, he received  an  LOR  for
dereliction in his duties in that he was found asleep  while  on  duty
which caused a delay in pre-flight processing of an aircraft.  (7)  On
or about 20 August 2001, he received an LOR for failure  to  go  to  a
mandatory medical appointment.  (8) On or about  2  October  2001,  he
received an LOR for failure to go to his appointed place  of  duty  at
the time prescribed.  (9) On or about 23 May 2002, he received an  LOR
for  failure  to  perform  a  necessary  pre-flight   inspection   and
wrongfully completed an official government document indicating he had
done the inspection.  (10) On or about 24 July 2002,  he  received  an
Article 15 for failure to go to his appointed place  of  duty  at  the
prescribed time, failure to obey a lawful order and dereliction in the
performance of his duties by failure to maintain his dormitory room in
accordance with set standards.  Punishment consisted of  reduction  to
the grade of airman basic, suspended through  23 January  2003,  after
which time it would be remitted without further action, unless  sooner
vacated, 30 days correctional custody, and a reprimand.   (11)  On  or
about 1 December 2002, he received  an  LOR  for  dereliction  in  his
duties in that he departed the local area without approved leave  from
his unit.

The applicant acknowledged receipt of the  notification  of  discharge
and waived his right to military counsel and submitted  statements  in
his own behalf.  The base legal office reviewed the case  file,  found
it legally sufficient to support separation and recommended  applicant
be discharged with 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.

Applicant was separated from the Air Force on 17  January  2003  under
the provisions of AFI 36-3208,  Administrative  Separation  of  Airmen
(misconduct), with an under honorable conditions (general)  discharge.
He had served 3 years, 10 months and 18 days on active duty.

The Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Board  (AFDRB)  denied  applicant’s
requests for upgrade of discharge to honorable, to change  the  reason
and authority for the discharge, and to change the  reenlistment  code
on 11 March 2004.  A copy of the AFDRB hearing record is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________




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 attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 10 June 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.   We  took  notice  of   the
applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case;
however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force
and adopt their rationale as the basis for  the  conclusion  that  the
applicant has not been the victim  of  an  error  or  injustice.   The
applicant has provided no evidence  showing  the  information  in  his
records is erroneous, his substantial rights  were  violated,  or  his
commanders abused their discretionary authority.   Therefore,  in  the
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find  no  basis  to  recommend
granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

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 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:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 May 05.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 7 Jun 05.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Jun 05.




                             KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
                             Panel Chair