RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                        DOCKET  NUMBER:   BC-2005-
03896
                                             INDEX CODE: 110.00

                                             COUNSEL: NONE

                                             HEARING DESIRED: NO



MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  24 JUNE 2007


___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Applicant states that there was no injustice;  he  simply  wants  a
slight upgrade on his separation paperwork.  At  the  time  of  his
career he had serious martial problems.  That  led  to  his  battle
with alcohol, which he can say is now resolved by  counseling.   He
feels he has rejoined society to be a  responsible  and  productive
member.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on  8  Nov  79,  for  a
period of four years in the grade of  airman  basic.   His  highest
grade held was senior airman.

Applicant’s Airman Performance Report (APR) profile follows:

      PERIOD ENDING               OVERALL EVALUATION
       7 Nov 80                      9
      28 Jul 81                      5
      28 Jul 82                      8
      23 May 83                      5

On 24 May 83, applicant’s wing commander notified him that  he  was
recommending he be discharged from the Air Force for a  pattern  of
misconduct.  He recommended the applicant receive  an  under  other
than honorable conditions separation based on the  following:   The
Commander lists 22 different reasons for  the  proposed  discharge,
including  violation  of  dormitory  standards  on  two  occasions;
violating AFR 35-10 on five  occasions;  failures  to  go  on  nine
occasions; Article 15 on 19 Nov 81 for damage to a  dormitory  fire
extinguisher, punishment imposed consisted of a suspended reduction
to the grade of airman; Letter  of  Reprimand  on  12  Aug  82  for
rolling through a stop sign with his vehicle; Article 15 on  5  Oct
82 for driving under the influence of alcohol;  punishment  imposed
consisted of suspended reduction to the grade of airman and 30 days
correctional custody; and Article 15 on 10 May 83 for  the  use  of
marijuana as evidenced by a  urinalysis  test;  punishment  imposed
consisted  of  reduction  to  the  grade  of  airman  first  class,
forfeiture of $171.00 of pay, and 14 days of extra duty.

Applicant acknowledged receipt of the  discharge  notification  and
offered a conditional waiver  of  his  rights  associated  with  an
administrative discharge board hearing contingent upon  receipt  of
no less than an under honorable conditions (general) discharge.  On
30 Jun 83, applicant’s commander rejected his  conditional  waiver.
On 7 Jul 83, applicant waived his rights to  a  hearing  before  an
administrative discharge board and indicated he understood  he  may
be  discharged  with  an  under  other  than  honorable  conditions
discharge.

On 28 Jul 83, the base legal office reviewed the case and found  it
legally sufficient and recommended applicant’s unconditional waiver
be accepted and that he be discharged  with  an  under  other  than
honorable    conditions    discharge    without    probation    and
rehabilitation.

On 4 Aug 83, the discharge authority approved  the  separation  and
directed an under other than honorable conditions discharge without
probation and rehabilitation.

On 5 Aug 83, applicant was discharged in the grade of airman basic,
under the provisions of AFR 39-10, for a pattern  of  misconduct  -
discreditable involvement with military or civil authorities,  with
an  under  other  than  honorable  conditions  discharge.   He  was
credited with 3 years, 8 months, and 28  days  of  active  military
service.

Pursuant  to  the  Board’s   request,   the   Federal   Bureau   of
Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided  a  copy  of  an
investigation report, which is attached at Exhibit C.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied, and states,  in
part, 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 did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or
injustices   that   occurred   in   the    discharge    processing.
Additionally, the applicant provided no facts warranting  a  change
to his character of service.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit D.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 10 Feb 06, 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 (Exhibit E).

On 24 Feb 06, the AFBCMR staff offered the applicant an opportunity
to provide information pertaining to his activities  since  leaving
the service (Exhibit F).  To date, no response has been received by
this office.

On 9 Mar 06,  a  copy  of  the  FBI  Report  of  Investigation  was
forwarded to the applicant for review and comment (Exhibit G).   To
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  careful
consideration of the available evidence, the discharge  appears  to
be in compliance with the governing regulations in  effect  at  the
time and we find no evidence to indicate that his  separation  from
the Air Force was inappropriate.  We find no evidence of  error  in
this  case  and  after  thoroughly  reviewing   the   documentation
submitted in support of applicant’s appeal, we do  not  believe  he
has suffered from an  injustice.   In  addition,  in  view  of  the
contents of the FBI Report of Investigation, we are  not  persuaded
that an upgrade of the characterization of applicant’s discharge is
warranted on the  basis  of  clemency.   Therefore,  based  on  the
available evidence of record,  we  find  no  basis  upon  which  to
favorably consider his request.

___________________________________________________________________




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-
03896 in Executive Session on 4 April 2006, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
      Ms. Mary C. Puckett, Member
      Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, undated.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  FBI Report of Investigation.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 6 Feb 06.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Feb 06.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 24 Feb 06.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 9 Mar 06.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair