RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-02254
            INDEX NUMBER:  110.00
      XXXXXXX
            COUNSEL:  NONE
      XXXXXXX
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 22 JANUARY 2007


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was not convicted of a crime. However, he  was  charged  but  never
convicted. The charges were  later  dismissed  and  purged.  During  a
recent Department of Justice search,  there  was  no  record  of  such
action. He believes that this would be  justified  because  he  served
honorably and had no disciplinary action as an airman.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 21 November 1990, for a
period of four years in the grade of airman basic.  His highest  grade
held was airman first class.

On 2 January 1992, applicant’s commander  notified  him  that  he  was
recommending he be discharged from the Air Force for  misconduct-civil
conviction.  He recommended the applicant  receive  a  general  (under
honorable conditions) discharge based on the fact applicant willfully,
unlawfully  and  fraudulently  issued  personal  checks  to   civilian
businesses in excess of  $2,000  dollars,  knowing  he  did  not  have
sufficient funds to cover the checks. Applicant was convicted by civil
court in Santa, Barbara, California.

On  2  January  1992,  after  consulting   with   counsel,   applicant
acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification, and chose  not  to
submit statement in his own behalf.
The base legal reviewed the case and found it  legally  sufficient  to
support  separation  and  recommended  applicant  receives  a  general
discharge  (under  honorable   conditions)   without   probation   and
rehabilitation.

On 2 January 1992, the discharge authority approved the separation and
directed the applicant be separated with a  general  (under  honorable
conditions) discharge without probation and rehabilitation.

On 6 January 1992, the applicant was discharged in the grade of airman
under the provisions of AFR  39-10,  Misconduct-Civil  Conviction  and
received a general (under honorable  conditions)  discharge.   He  was
issued an RE Code of 2K.  He served on active duty for a period  of  1
year, 1 month, and 16 days.

On 9 April 1996, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (DRB) denied his
application and  concluded  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.

On 3 November 2003, the DRB after a second review determined that  the
applicant was not entitled to a personal appearance before the DRB. He
was scheduled for a personal appearance before the  DRB  on  22  March
1996 and failed to respond.  He was directed to appeal his request  to
the Air Force Board for the Correction of Military Records.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS reviewed this application  and  recommended  denial.   They
stated, in part, that 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.   The
applicant provided no evidence or identified any errors or  injustices
that occurred in the  discharge  processing.   He  provided  no  facts
warranting a change to the character of service.

AFPC/DPPRS’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________





APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 5
August 2005 for review and comment 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.  After a thorough review  of  the
evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we  are  not  persuaded
that his discharge should be  upgraded  to  honorable.   We  note  the
applicant’s contentions, to  include  that  his  criminal  record  was
purged on 22 May 2001.  However, the evidence of records shows that on
13 December 1991, he was convicted in civil  court  for  writing  over
$2000  in  bad  checks  and  sentenced   to   30   days   confinement.
Subsequently, his commander recommended he be discharged from the  Air
Force for Misconduct-Civil Conviction with a general (under  honorable
conditions) discharge.  The  applicant  has  not  established  by  his
submission that his commander abused his discretionary authority,  and
since we find no abuse of  that  authority,  there  is  no  compelling
reason to overturn  the  commander’s  decision.   We  agree  with  the
opinions and recommendation of the Air Force and adopt  its  rationale
as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain
his burden of  having  suffered  either  an  error  or  an  injustice.
Therefore, in absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to
recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

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-
02254 in Executive Session on 15 September 2005, under the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
      Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Member
      Ms. Jan Mulligan, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 8 Jul 05.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 1 Aug 05.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Aug 05.





                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair