RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-01602
      INDEX CODE:  110.00
      COUNSEL:  NO

      HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE:  24 OCTOBER 2008

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general discharge be upgraded to honorable.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was told  that  after  one  year  his  discharge  would  be  upgraded  to
honorable.  He  has  been  attempting  employment  at  the  local  base  and
believes his DD 214 is keeping him from being hired.  He is also seeking  VA
benefits.

In support of his application, the applicant submits a copy of  his  DD  214
and his application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 23 Mar 79, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the age  of
20 in  the  grade  of  airman  basic  for  a  period  of  6 years.   He  was
progressively promoted to the grade of sergeant, effective and with  a  date
of rank of 1 Nov 82.

On 24 Jan 86, , the applicant’s commander notified  the  applicant  that  he
was recommending his separation from the Air Force under the  provisions  of
AFR 39-10, para 5-46 for a pattern of misconduct.

The following is a list of the applicant’s infractions:

      a)  On 9 Sep 82, the  applicant  was  issued  a  vehicle  registration
citation for not having a safety inspection sticker.

      b)  On 3 Dec 82, he was cited by the base traffic control  police  for
speeding.  For this offense, he was assessed four traffic points.

      c)  On 25 Jan 83, he received an Article 15 for failure to go  to  his
appointed place of duty on 20 Jan 83.

      d)  On 28 Jul 83, he was found in violation of not  wearing  his  seat
belt on base.

      e)  On 6 Aug 84, he failed to  attend  a  Chemical  Warfare  Refresher
Training class.  For this offense, he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR).

      f)  On 28 Nov 85, he failed to show for a schedule  court  appearance.
A Memo for Record was written.

      g)  On 7 Jun 85, he failed to attend a  Nuclear  Surety  and  Chemical
Warfare Training class.  For this offense, he received a LOR.

      h)  On 23 Sep 85, he failed to attend a  Nuclear  Surety  class.   For
this offense he received a LOR.

      i)  On 21 Nov  85,  he  wrongfully  and  unlawfully  subscribed  under
lawful oath a false statement.  For this offense,  he  received  an  Article
15.

He was reduced to the grade of airman first  class,  effective  and  with  a
date of rank of 8 Jan 86.

The applicant was advised of his  rights.   Under  advice  of  counsel,  the
applicant offered a conditional waiver of  the  rights  associated  with  an
administrative discharge board hearing, contingent upon his  receipt  of  no
less than a general discharge.  The  discharge  case  was  reviewed  by  the
Staff Judge Advocate and found  legally  sufficient.   On  27  Feb  86,  the
discharge authority  approved  applicant’s  general  discharge  without  the
offer of probation and rehabilitation.

On 28 Feb 86, the applicant was discharged because of  misconduct –  pattern
of minor disciplinary infractions.  He served 6 years, 11 months and 7  days
on active duty, to include 1 year and 6 months of Foreign Service.

A resume of his Airman Performance Reports (APRs) follows:

Closeout Date    Overall Evaluation

17 Nov 85        7
17 Jan 85        8
17 Jan 84        8
17 Jan 83        9
17 Jan 82        8
17 Jan 81        8
22 Mar 80        7

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:

None.  The applicant has not shown the  characterization  of  his  discharge
was contrary to the provisions of AFR 39-10 Minor  Disciplinary  Infractions
(attached as 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:

On 22 Jun 07, the applicant was provided a copy of the FBI  report  (Exhibit
C), and was invited to submit information  pertaining  to  his  post-service
activities (Exhibit E).  To date, we have not received a response to any  of
the aforementioned correspondence.

________________________________________________________________

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.   After  careful  consideration  of  the
available evidence, 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  the
applicant was not afforded all the rights to which entitled at the  time  of
discharge.  We conclude, therefore,  that  the  discharge  proceedings  were
proper  and  characterization  of  the  discharge  was  appropriate  to  the
existing circumstances.  We would like to point out that the  applicant  has
not provided documentation pertaining to his post  service  activities.   In
view of the contents of the FBI Identification Record, we are not  persuaded
that the characterization of the applicant’s discharge warrants  an  upgrade
to honorable; thus, we find no basis to warrant  favorable  action  on  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 AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2007-
01602 in Executive Session on 9 Aug 2007, under the provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

            Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
            Ms. Teri G. Spoutz, Member
            Ms. Sharon B. Seymour, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 13 May 07 w/atch.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  FBI Report.
      Exhibit D.  Extract, AFR 39-10.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 22 Jun 07.




                                  MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
                                  Panel Chair