RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-01945
            INDEX NUMBER:  110.00
      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  None

      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED:  No


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  15 Dec 06


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  under  other  than  honorable  conditions  (UOTHC)  discharge  be
upgraded to honorable and he be allowed to retire from the Air Force.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

After 20 plus years of  service  he  was  made  a  scapegoat  and  his
commander and first sergeant lied under oath.   He  was  discriminated
against because of his ethnic background.   The  commander  and  first
sergeant told him he did not belong.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered active duty in the Air Force on 29 Mar 84.

On 14 Aug 03, the applicant’s squadron commander notified him that  he
was recommending his discharge from the Air Force  for  a  pattern  of
misconduct in accordance  with  AFI  36-3208.   The  reasons  for  the
commander’s actions were:

        a.  Disobeying a lawful order.  Applicant was reduced in grade
to  senior  airman  by  vacation  of  suspended   punishment   imposed
previously under Article 15 on 15 May 03.  The applicant also received
an undated Letter of Reprimand (LOR) on 24 Jul 03.

        b.  The applicant was punished under Article 15 on  15 May  03
for willfully damaging military property on two occasions.

        c.  Applicant  was  charged  with  being  a  public  drunk  by
civilian law enforcement authorities after  becoming  belligerent  and
uncooperative after being  found  passed  out  along  a  public  road.
Applicant received an LOR with an Unfavorable Information File entry.

        d.  On 8 Oct 01,  the  applicant  was  given  a  ticket  by  a
Security Forces patrolman for excessive use  of  his  privately  owned
vehicle’s audible system.  He was counseled by his unit.

        e.  The applicant was punished under Article 15  on  5 Sep  01
for drunk and disorderly conduct of a nature to bring discredit to the
armed forces.

        f.  The  applicant  received  an  LOR  dated  22  Feb  01  for
attempting to contact a non-prior service airman by e-mail.

The applicant acknowledged receipt on 14 Aug 03.  On 28  Aug  03,  the
applicant advised his commander he had consulted counsel  and  elected
to have a board  hearing.   On  31  Oct  03,  the  squadron  commander
notified the applicant he was amending the  previous  notification  to
include the following infractions:

        a.  The applicant received  punishment  on  15  May  03  under
Article 15 for kicking a female in the abdomen.

        b.  Charged  by  civilian  law  enforcement  authorities  with
driving under the influence.

The applicant acknowledged receipt on 3 Nov 03 and elected to  have  a
board hearing and  did  not  submit  statements  in  his  behalf.   An
administrative discharge board was convened 17 through 18 Nov 03.  The
board  recommended  the   applicant   be   discharged   with   service
characterized  as   UOTHC   and   not   be   offered   probation   and
rehabilitation.  On 23 Jan 04, the Wing  Staff  Judge  Advocate  (SJA)
found the discharge board’s hearing to be procedurally proper and  its
findings correct.  On 4 Feb 04, the Numbered  Air  Force  (NAF)  Staff
Judge Advocate  found  the  discharge  action  against  the  applicant
legally sufficient.  They  also  noted  the  applicant  had  requested
lengthy service consideration and that the package must  be  forwarded
to AFPC.  The Major Command (MajCom) DP recommended to AFPC  that  the
applicant’s request for lengthy service consideration  be  denied  and
that he be discharged with a UOTHC  discharge  without  probation  and
rehabilitation.

On 3 Apr 04, the applicant became retirement eligible  and  on  15 Apr
04, requested voluntary retirement.   On  19  Apr  04,  the  Wing  SJA
recommended the commander recommend to  the  NAF  commander  that  the
request  be  denied.   The  Wing  commander  recommended  to  the  NAF
commander the applicant’s request be denied.  On 26  Apr  04,  on  the
advice of his  SJA,  the  NAF  commander  recommended  to  the  MajCom
commander that the applicant’s retirement request be denied  and  that
he be discharged for a pattern of misconduct with  a  UOTHC  discharge
without probation and rehabilitation.  On 25 May  04,  the  MajCom  JA
recommended  to  the  MajCom  Director  of  Personnel  (DP)  that  the
applicant’s retirement application be denied.  On 2 Jun 04, the MajCom
DP recommended to AFPC that  the  applicant’s  retirement  request  be
denied and that he be discharged with a UOTHC discharge.  On 9 Jun  04
the case was forwarded to the Secretary of  the  Air  Force  Personnel
Council (SAFPC) for a determination.  On 13 Jul 04, the Director,  Air
Force Review Boards Agency disapproved  the  applicant’s  request  for
retirement and directed that his approved discharge be executed.   The
applicant was discharged on 15 Jul 04.

A resume of the applicant’s  last  ten  Enlisted  Performance  Reports
(EPRs) follows:

      Closeout Date                     Overall Rating

        31 Oct 93                            5
        31 Oct 94                            5
        01 Jun 95                            5
        01 Jun 96                            4
        01 Jun 97                            4
        01 Jun 98                            5
        01 Jun 99                            5
        01 Jun 00                            5
        01 Jun 01                            4
       *01 Jun 02                            2
      **01 Jun 03                            2

* Referral Report
** Referral Report

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial of the applicant’s request. The applicant
did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices  that
occurred  in  the  discharge  process.    He  has  provided  no  facts
warranting a change to his character of service.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPRRP  recommends  denial  of  the  applicant’s  requests.   All
regulatory procedures that apply to the applicant’s case were followed
and the applicant was given an opportunity to  request  retirement  in
lieu of discharge.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on
15 Jul 05 for review and comment within 30 days.  To date, a  response
has not been received.

_________________________________________________________________



ADDITIONAL INFORMATION


A copy of the memorandum prepared by the Secretary of  the  Air  Force
Personnel Council (SAFPC) after considering and recommending denial of
the applicant’s request  for  retirement  in  lieu  of  administrative
discharge was forwarded to the applicant  for  comment.   SAFPC  noted
that the applicant had nearly 17 years of active duty service when his
misconduct began.  Over the course of the  following  two  years,  his
chain of command took extensive measures to rehabilitate  him  and  to
ensure his retirement.  Despite numerous efforts, to include referrals
to ADAPT, inpatient treatment, and rehabilitative forms of punishment,
the applicant failed to take the  necessary  steps  required  of  him.
Whether or not he would earn a retirement was ultimately determined by
the applicant’s own conduct.  SAFPC also noted there  was  no  command
support for the applicant’s retirement.

The complete memorandum, with attachments, is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

A copy of the SAFPC memorandum was forwarded to the  applicant  on  12
Aug 05 for review and comment within 30 days.  To date, the  applicant
has not responded.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing  law
or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

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 opinions and  recommendations  of  the  Air
Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their  rationale  as
the primary basis for our conclusion that the applicant has  not  been
the victim of an  error  or  injustice.   Additionally,  as  has  been
pointed out by SAFPC in their review  of  the  applicant’s  case,  the
applicant’s chain of command took “extensive measures to  rehabilitate
him to ensure his retirement.”  “Despite numerous efforts” to help the
applicant, he failed to take the  necessary  steps  required  of  him.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to  the  contrary,  we  find  no
compelling 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 Docket  Number  BC-2005-
01945 in Executive Session on 21 September 2005, under the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Joseph G. Diamond, Panel Chair
      Mr. Charlie E. Williams, Jr., Member
      Mr. Jay H. Jordan, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 25 May 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 5 Jul 05.
    Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPRRP, dated 8 Jul 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Jul 05.
    Exhibit F.  Memorandum, SAF/MRBP, dated 12 Jul 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 12 Aug 05.




                                   JOSEPH G. DIAMOND
                                   Panel Chair