RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-03270
      INDEX CODE:  110.00
      COUNSEL:  NONE

      HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE:  28 APRIL 2008

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was discharged for an  alleged  event  without  trial  or  hearing.   The
military  never  investigated  and  all  charges  were  dropped  after   his
discharge.  The case was not closed until 2001 and is affecting his  ability
to be hired under military contract.

In support of his application, the applicant submits  a  copy  of  a  letter
from the  assistant  district  attorney  of  the  Ninth  Judicial  District,
Alexandria, Louisiana.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 19 Aug 82, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the age  of
18 in the grade of airman  basic  for  a  period  of       6  years.   After
completing  basic  military  and  technical  training,  the  applicant   was
assigned duties as an Explosive Ordinance Disposal Specialist.

On 8 Mar 83, he was in violation of a  lawful  general  order  by  having  a
shotgun and alcohol in his dormitory room.  For this  offense,  he  received
an Article 15.

On 27 Aug 83, after being advised by the Squadron Section Commander to  stay
away from the dining hall except to eat,  he  did  enter  the  facility  and
display disrespect toward a superior NCO by using profanity  and  disrupting
the work area.  For this offense, he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR).

On 27 Sep 83, he received a ticket for expired license plates.

On 4 Sep 84, he received a Letter  of  Reprimand  for  assaulting  his  wife
(another military member) at their home by taking her clothes  off,  beating
her and pointing a gun at her.

On 15 Sep 84, the applicant’s commander notified the applicant that  he  was
recommending the applicant  be  separated  from  the  Air  Force  under  the
provisions of AFR 39-10 because of misconduct.  The  applicant  was  advised
of  his  rights,  acknowledged  receipt  of  the  notification  and,   after
consulting military legal counsel, submitted statements in his  own  behalf.


In a legal review of the discharge case file dated  10  Oct  84,  the  staff
judge advocate found the file was legally sufficient  and  recommended  that
the applicant be separated from the service with a  general  discharge.   On
18 Oct 84, the discharge authority approved the recommended  separation  and
directed the applicant be discharged for  the  reasons  recommended  by  his
commander, without the offer of probation and rehabilitation.

On 19 Aug 82, the applicant was discharged with a  general  under  honorable
conditions discharge.  He served 2 years 2 months  and  26  days  on  active
duty.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation  (FBI),
Clarksburg, West Virginia,  provided  a  copy  of  an  investigative  report
pertaining to  the  former  member  (Identification  Record  No.  155882DA1)
(Exhibit C).
________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ  AFPC/DPPRS  recommends  denial.   DPPRS  states  that   based   on   the
documentation on file in  the  applicant’s  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.  Additionally, the applicant  did  not  submit  any
evidence  or  identify  any  errors  or  injustices  that  occurred  in  the
discharge processing, and he provided no facts warranting an upgrade of  his
discharge.

DPPRS complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.

HQ AFPC/JA recommends  denial.   JA  states  the  applicant  has  failed  to
exercise the due diligence required  by  law.   In  addition,  there  is  no
justification to grant the requested relief.

The complete JA evaluation is at exhibit E.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the  applicant  on  15
Dec 06 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this  office
has received no response (Exhibit F).

________________________________________________________________

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 opinions and recommendations of the Air Force  offices  of  primary
responsibility and adopt their rationale as the  basis  for  our  conclusion
that the applicant has not  been  the  victim  of  an  error  or  injustice.
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 probable 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 7 February 2007 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

           Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
           Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member
           Ms. Jan Mulligan, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with  AFBCMR
Docket Number BC-2006-03270:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 Oct 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  FBI Report.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPRS, dated 6 Nov 06.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, HQ AFPC.JA, dated 7 Dec 06.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Dec 06.





      THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
      Chair