RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-03543
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  20 May 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He didn’t know that it was his responsibility  to  get  his  discharge
upgraded.  He thought  his  DD  Form  214  would  have  been  upgraded
automatically after six months of his discharge.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a copy of his DD Form 214,
a copy  of  his  Oath  of  Extension  of  Enlistment  or  Reenlistment
document, and a copy of DD Form 293.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The former member enlisted in  the  Regular  as  an  airman  basic  on
3 December 1981, for a term of six years.  On 9  September  1985,  his
commander notified him that he was recommending he be discharged  from
the  Air  Force  for  misconduct.   The  bases  for  the   commander’s
recommendation were:  He received three  Articles  15:   (1)  26  July
1984, for incapacitating himself for the  performance  of  his  duties
through prior indulgence in intoxicating liquor; punishment  consisted
of reduction to the grade of airman first class and ordered to forfeit
$100.00, but  that  portion  of  this  punishment  that  provided  for
reduction to the grade of airman first class  was  suspended  until  1
December 1984,  at  which  time,  unless  the  suspension  was  sooner
vacated, it would have been remitted without further  action.   (2)  4
June 1985, for disobeying a  lawful  order;  punishment  consisted  of
reduction to the grade of airman first class.  (3) 9 August 1985,  for
being absent from duty; punishment consisted of reduction to the grade
of airman basic and 60 days restriction.   He  received  a  Letter  of
Reprimand for dereliction of  duty;  he  was  formally  counseled  for
violating Airman Dormitory Standards; and his stereo  privileges  were
withdrawn for playing his stereo too loud.  He acknowledged receipt of
the notification of discharge and waived his rights  to  consult  with
legal counsel and submit statements in his own behalf.  The base legal
office  found  it  legally  sufficient  to  support   separation   and
recommended discharge with an  under  honorable  conditions  (general)
discharge  without  probation  and  rehabilitation.    The   discharge
authority approved the separation and directed that he  be  discharged
with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge.  On 15 October
1985, he was discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR
39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen (misconduct  –  pattern  of
conduct prejudicial to good  order  and  discipline),  with  an  under
honorable conditions (general)  discharge.   He  served  3  years,  10
months and 13 days on active duty.

Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of  Investigation,
Clarksburg, WV, indicated on the basis of the data furnished they were
unable to locate an arrest record (Exhibit C).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states 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 new evidence  or  identify
any errors or injustices that occurred in  the  discharge  processing,
nor did he provide any facts warranting a change to his  character  of
service.

A complete copy of the 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
15 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.    We find no impropriety in the  characterization  of  applicant’s
discharge.  It appears that responsible officials applied  appropriate
standards in effecting the separation, and we do not  find  persuasive
evidence that pertinent regulations were violated  or  that  applicant
was not afforded all the rights to  which  entitled  at  the  time  of
discharge.  We conclude, therefore, that the applicant has  failed  to
sustain his burden of establishing that the discharge proceedings were
improper  and  that  the  characterization  of   the   discharge   was
inappropriate based on the existing circumstances.

4.    We also find insufficient evidence to warrant  a  recommendation
that the discharge be upgraded on the  basis  of  clemency.   We  have
considered applicant’s overall quality of  service  and  the  offenses
leading to his separation.  However, based on the evidence  of  record
and in the absence of documentation  pertaining  to  his  post-service
accomplishments, we cannot conclude that clemency  is  warranted.   In
view of the above, we cannot recommend approval based on  the  current
evidence of record.

_________________________________________________________________

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 January 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-2006-03543 was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Nov 06, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. FBI Report.
      Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 1 Dec 06.
      Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Dec 06.




                             MICHAEL J. NOVEL
                             Panel Chair