RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-03428
            INDEX CODE:  110.00, 112.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  10 May 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His under honorable conditions  (general)  discharge  be  upgraded  to
honorable and his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2B be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was wrongfully discharged from the military.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a personal statement and a
copy of his DD Form 214.

Applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 31 August 1993.  On
24 January 1995, he was notified by his commander he was  recommending
he be separated from the Air Force under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, for misconduct.  The  bases
for  the  recommendation  were:   (1)  he  received  two  Letters   of
Counseling (LOCs) for writing a check with insufficient funds  in  his
checking account, and for not meeting dress and appearance  standards,
financial responsibilities and base housing responsibilities;  (2)  he
received an Article 15 for  writing  three  checks  with  insufficient
funds in his checking account (totally $746.30); (3) he received  five
Letters of Reprimand (LORs) for  writing  a  check  with  insufficient
funds in his  checking  account,  for  failure  to  maintain  positive
control of a military vehicle resulting in damage to the vehicle,  for
in defiance of direction given to him  not  to  drive  any  government
vehicle; for failure to wear his  hat  outside;  and  for  a  domestic
disturbance between he and his wife  and  the  Security  Police  (SP).
Upon entrance to his quarters, the SP found applicant’s  residence  in
an  unsatisfactory  condition  and  Family  Advocacy  were  called  to
determine if  his  10-month  old  daughter  was  in  any  danger.   He
acknowledged receipt of the notification and submitted  statements  in
his own behalf.  The base legal office  reviewed  the  recommendation,
found it legally sufficient, and recommended separation with an  under
honorable  conditions  (general)  discharge  without   probation   and
rehabilitation.   The   discharge   authority   concurred   with   the
recommendations and directed his separation.  He was separated  on  13
February 1995.  He served 1 year, 5 months and 13 days on active duty.
 He was assigned RE code 2B which denotes “Separated with a general or
under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge”.

On 24 March 2000, the applicant submitted an application  to  the  Air
Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting  his  under  honorable
conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to an  honorable  discharge
and his RE code changed.  The AFDRB considered  all  the  evidence  of
record and concluded the misconduct was a significant  departure  from
conduct expected of all  military  and  the  characterization  of  the
discharge received  by  the  applicant  was  appropriate.   The  board
further concluded the discharge was consistent with the procedural and
substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, was  within  the
discretion of the discharge authority, and the applicant was  provided
full administrative due process (Exhibit B).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS  recommends  denial.   DPPRS  states  the   discharge   was
consistent with the procedural and  substantive  requirements  of  the
discharge regulation and was within the discretion  of  the  discharge
authority.  The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify  any
errors in his discharge processing.

A complete copy of the 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 1
December 2006 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date,
this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________





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 opinion and recommendation of the Air Force
and adopt its rationale as the  basis  for  the  conclusion  that  the
applicant has not been the victim  of  an  error  or  injustice.   The
applicant did not submit  any  evidence  or  identify  any  errors  or
injustices that occurred  in  the  discharge  processing  nor  did  he
provide  any  facts  warranting  a  change  to  his  under   honorable
conditions (general) discharge.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence
to the contrary, we find no basis to  recommend  granting  the  relief
sought in this application.

4.    The applicant's case is adequately documented  and  it  has  not
been shown that a personal appearance with  or  without  counsel  will
materially  add  to  our  understanding  of  the  issue(s)   involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 25 Janaury 2007, under the provisions of AFI  36-
2603:

                 Mr. Michael J. Novel, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Garry G. Sauner, Member
                 Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member







The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket  Number
BC-2006-03428 was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Oct 06, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 16 Nov 06.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Dec 06.




                             MICHAEL J. NOVEL
                             Panel Chair