RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-01862
      INDEX CODE:  110.00
      COUNSEL:  NONE

      HEARING DESIRED:

MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE:  15 NOVEMBER 2008

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The decision by the Air Force Discharge Review Board  (AFDRB)  to  deny  his
request to upgrade his discharge to  honorable  was  unjust.   He  wants  to
clear his record and has paid a heavy price.  He accepts responsibility  for
his actions and is thankful that God has allowed him and his family to  live
a good life in spite of his discharge.  He  has  no  plans  to  reenter  any
branch of military service, but needs closure.  He disagrees  with  some  of
the charges.  The documents submitted with his  application  show  financial
responsibility and his credit history which were reasons  the  AFDRB  denied
his earlier request.  His wife has suffered from  health  issues  caused  by
his problems while he served in the military.  He  has  been  a  productive,
law abiding, upstanding citizen since his discharge.  He is nine hours  from
receiving a degree in Public Administration.

In support of his application, the applicant submits copies  of  constituent
response e-mail traffic from a member of the Senate, a  copy  of  a  college
transcript, a copy of a mortgage account statement, and a copy of a  medical
summary  on  his  spouse.   The  applicant’s   complete   submission,   with
attachments, is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 10 Dec 90, the applicant enlisted into  the  Regular  Air  Force  in  the
grade of airman basic for  a  period  of  4  years.   He  was  progressively
promoted to the grade of staff sergeant, effective and with a date  of  rank
of 1 Dec 98.  Due to Article 15 action, he  was  reduced  to  the  grade  of
senior airman, effective and  with  a  date  of  rank  of  9  Oct  02.   The
following is a resume of his Enlisted Performance Reports (EPRs):

      PERIOD ENDING    OVERALL EVALUATION

             9 Aug 92        4
            15 Apr 93        3
            15 Apr 94        5
            15 Apr 95        5
            15 Apr 96        4
            29 Mar 97        4
            29 Mar 98        4
            29 Mar 99        4
             4 Feb 00        4
             4 Feb 01        3
             4 Feb 02        3

The applicant was involved in a number  of  minor  disciplinary  infractions
from  Oct  00  through  Jul  02,  receiving   various   administrative   and
disciplinary actions.

As a result, on 16 Dec 02, the applicant’s commander notified  him  that  he
was recommending his separation from the Air Force under the  provisions  of
AFI 36-3208, Chapter 5, Paragraph 5.49 for minor  disciplinary  infractions.
He was advised of his rights, acknowledged receipt of the notification  and,
after consulting military legal counsel, offered  a  conditional  waiver  of
the rights associated with an administrative  discharge  hearing  contingent
upon his receipt of no less than a General Discharge.   A  legal  review  of
the discharge case file by the staff judge advocate found the  file  legally
sufficient and recommended  the  applicant  be  discharged  with  a  general
discharge without the opportunity  for  probation  and  rehabilitation.   On
24 Jan  03,  the  discharge  authority  approved  the   recommendation   for
discharge.  On 27 Jan 03, the applicant was issued a  general  discharge  in
the grade of senior airman.  He had served 12 years, 1 month and 17 days  on
active duty service.

On 3 Nov 05, the Air Force  Discharge  Review  Board  (AFDRB)  reviewed  and
denied a similar request by the applicant.  The AFDRB  found  the  discharge
was consistent with the  procedural  and  substantive  requirements  of  the
discharge regulation, was within the discretion of the  discharge  authority
and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process.

________________________________________________________________

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.

The complete DPPRS 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  3  Jul
07 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  office  of  primary
responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for the 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 9 August 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

               Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz,  Chair
               Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Member
               Mr. Joseph D. Yount, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered for AFBCMR  Docket  Number
BC-2007-01862:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 6 Jun 07 w/atch.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 21 Jun 07.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Jul 07.




                                  THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                  Chair