RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

      IN THE MATTER OF:            DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-01999
            INDEX CODE: 110.00
      XXXXXXX          COUNSEL:  AMERICAN LEGION

                                   HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 9 DECEMBER 2007
__________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He served a 12-month tour of duty in Vietnam and  three  years  in  Europe.
With one month left in the service, he was given the option  to  remain  in
service and or Europe (not clear in the applicant’s personal statement) for
30 more days or accept a general discharge.  He states at the time  he  was
young and dumb and elected to take a general discharge.   He  believes  the
incidents causing him to be reduced in grade were minor.  In his last  year
of service, he was accepted at  Indiana  University  (IU)  in  Bloomington,
Indiana and requested an early discharge but it was  disapproved.   Because
his request was disapproved, he  decided  he  would  be  discharged  anyway
possible.  Since his discharge in March 1972, he has never  been  arrested,
has maintained a clean  record  and  is  married  with  both  children  and
grandchildren. He has a Baccalaureate’s Degree from IU and has been a staff
writer for his hometown newspaper for 10 years.

In support of the appeal, the applicant submits  a  personal  statement,  a
letter from the American Legion, and a copy  of  his  DD  Form  214,  Armed
Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge.

The complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Air Force on 16 May 68 in  the  grade  of  airman
basic.  On 25 February 1972, he was notified by his commander that  he  was
recommending he be discharged from the Air Force under  the  provisions  of
AFM 39-12, Separation for  Unsuitability,  Misconduct,  Personal  Abuse  of
Drugs; Resignation or Request for Discharge for the good  of  the  Service;
and Procedures for the Rehabilitation Program.   The  specific  reason  for
this action were on 9 and 10 September 1971, applicant  was  counseled  for
refusing to obey a lawful order to shave; on 14 September 1971, he received
an Article 15 for failure to repair  on  two  occasions  and  disobeying  a
lawful order;  on 8 February 1972 he was given an Article 15 for failure to
repair; and on 10 February 1972, he received an Article  15  for  departing
his squadron without proper authority.  He was advised  of  his  rights  in
this matter and acknowledged receipt of the  notification  on  25  February
1972. The applicant waived his right to counsel and elected not  to  submit
statements on his own behalf.  In a legal review of his case the base legal
office found it legally sufficient and recommended a general discharge. The
applicant was discharged in the grade of airman basic on 27 March 1972 with
service characterized as a general.  He served  a  total  of  3  years,  10
months and 12 days on active duty.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the FBI indicated that on the basis on the
data furnished, they were unable to locate an arrest record.  (Exhibit C).
________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS  recommends  denial.   DPPRS  states  that  the  discharge   was
consistent  with  the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements  of   the
discharge regulation.  In addition, the  discharge  was  within  the  sound
discretion of the discharge authority.  He did not submit any new  evidence
or identify any  errors  or  injustices  that  occurred  in  his  discharge
processing.  The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  the  applicant  on  13
July 2006 for review and comment within 30 days.  As  of  this  date,  this
office has received no response (Exhibit E).
________________________________________________________________

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 an error or injustice.   After  careful  consideration  of  the
available evidence, we found no indication that the actions taken to  affect
his discharge were improper or contrary to the provisions of  the  governing
regulations in effect at the time, or that the  actions  taken  against  the
applicant were based on factors other than his own  misconduct.   Therefore,
we agree with the opinion and recommendation of  the  Air  Force  office  of
primary responsibility  and  adopt  its  rationale  as  the  basis  for  our
conclusion that the applicant has  not  been  the  victim  of  an  error  or
injustice.

________________________________________________________________

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 AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2006-
01999 in Executive Session on 22 August 2006, under the  provisions  of  AFI
36-2603:

                 Mr. Robert H. Altman, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Wallace F. Beard Jr., Member
                 Ms. Karen A. Holloman, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 June 2006, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 30 June 2006.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 July 2006.




                                   ROBERT H. ALTMAN
                                   Panel Chair