RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01451
            INDEX CODE:  110.02
            COUNSEL:  None
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 11 NOVEMBER 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He admits to and was guilty of minor disciplinary infractions.  However,  as
a saved  Christian  believer,  he  apologizes  for  those  infractions.   He
believes and trusts in God and hopes the Board will open  their  hearts  and
upgrade his discharge to honorable.

The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force (RegAF) on 3 April 1991,  as
an airman basic (AB) for a period of four years.

On 20 November 1991, the applicant’s commander  notified  him  that  he  was
recommending him for discharge from the Air Force (AF) under the  provisions
of Air Force Regulation (AFR) 39-10 for misconduct.   The  specific  reasons
for the discharge action were:

      a.    On 10 September 1991, the applicant was counseled for a security
violation.  He left his dormitory locker unlocked.


      b.    On 13 September 1991, the applicant was counseled for failing to
go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of  duty  on  11  September
1991.


      c.    On 13 September 1991, the applicant was counseled for failing to
go at the prescribed time to his appointed place of  duty  on  13  September
1991.



d.    On 16 September 1991, the applicant was counseled for being  late  for
a mandatory bay meeting on 5 September 1991.


      e.    On 28 October 1991, the received an Article 15 for failing to go
at the prescribed time to his appointed place of duty on 8 October 1991.


      f.    On 28 October  1991,  the  applicant  was  counseled  for  being
derelict in the performance of his duty on 10 October 1991.


      g.    On 29 October 1991, the applicant was counseled and  reprimanded
for being disrespectful to a noncommissioned officer  (NCO)  on  22  October
1991.


      h.    On 29 October 1991, the applicant was counseled by  his  Student
Training Advisor and Chief Student Training Advisor for being  disrespectful
to an NCO on 22 October 1991.


      i.    On 7 and 8  November  1991,  the  applicant  was  counseled  and
reprimanded for being in direct violation  of  a  general  regulation  on  6
November 1991.


      j.    On 8 November 1991, the applicant was  counseled  by  his  Chief
Student Training Advisor and reprimanded  by  his  Commander  for  being  in
direct violation of a lawful general regulation.

The commander advised the applicant of his right in this matter.

On 20 November 1991, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the  notification
of discharge and after consulting with legal counsel submitted  a  statement
in his own behalf.

On 26 November 1991, a legal review was conducted in which the  staff  judge
advocate recommended the applicant be discharged with  a  general  discharge
without probation and rehabilitation.

On 3 December 1991, the  discharge  authority  approved  the  discharge  and
directed the applicant be discharged without probation  and  rehabilitation.
The applicant was discharged on 4 December 1991.   He  served  eight  months
and one day on active duty.

Pursuant to the  Board’s  request,  the  Federal  Bureau  of  investigation,
Washington, D.C., indicated on the basis of the  data  furnished  they  were
unable to locate an arrest record (Exhibit C).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

None.  The applicant has not shown the  characterization  of  his  discharge
was contrary to the provisions of AFR 39-10,  Administrative  Separation  of
Airmen, paragraph 5-46 (Exhibit D).  Nor has he  shown  the  nature  of  the
discharge was unduly harsh or disproportionate to  the  offenses  committed.
Notwithstanding the absence  of  error  or  injustice,  the  Board  has  the
prerogative to grant relief on the basis of clemency if so inclined.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF FBI REPORT:

On  21  June  2007,  the  Board  staff  requested  the   applicant   provide
documentation pertaining to his activities since leaving  military  service.
He has not responded (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 an injustice.  We took notice  of  the  applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we find  the
applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof  that  he  has  suffered
either an error  or  an  injustice.   Based  on  the  documentation  in  the
applicant's records, it appears that the  characterization  of  his  service
and the processing of the discharge were  appropriate  and  accomplished  in
accordance  with  Air  Force  regulation.   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 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-2007-01451,
in Executive Session on 28 August 2007, under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                       Mr. James W. Russell III, Panel Chair
                       Mr. Elwood C. Lewis III, Member
                       Mr. Mark J. Novitski, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, undated.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  FBI Negative Reply.
     Exhibit D.  Extract, AFR 39-10.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 21 Jun 07, w/atch.




                             JAMES W. RUSSELL III
                             Panel Chair