RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-02182
                                             INDEX CODE:  106.00, 110.00
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX                COUNSEL:  NONE

                                             HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  January 6, 2009


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His characterization of service be upgraded  from  general  under  honorable
conditions to honorable.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He has completed the time-frame directed by his  former  squadron  commander
for successful upgrade of his discharge.

He has served in his community as a firefighter for  10  years  and  doesn’t
have a criminal record, other  than  minor  driving  infractions  that  were
taken care of as directed.

He lost paperwork during his move to his home of  record  and  recently  was
reminded that he could get his discharge upgraded to honorable.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air  Force  on  26  February  1980  for  a
period of four years, and served as a security specialist.

On 3 November 1982, applicant was notified  of  his  commander's  intent  to
recommend him for an under  honorable  conditions  (general)  discharge  for
dishonorable failure to pay just debts, specifically:

        a. Six dishonored check notifications, dated 28 January 1982 (second
           notification - $22.39), 15 January  1982  (first  notification  -
           $22.39), 12 January 1982 ($200.00), 6 January 1982  ($30.00),  12
           January 1982 ($115.00), and 25 January 1982 ($50.00)

        b. Letter of Reprimand, dated 29 January 1982, for dishonored checks
           in the amount of $50.00 and $21.00

        c. Letter of Reprimand, dated 10 March  1982,  due  to  the  Forsyth
           Police Department visiting  K.I.  Sawyer  AFB,  specifically  his
           quarters,  to  collect  for  two  checks  he  had  written   with
           insufficient funds to cover them

        d. Control Roster Action, dated 10 March  1982,  due  to  dishonored
           checks

        e. Unfavorable Information File action, dated 10 March 1982, due  to
           dishonored checks

        f. 26 returned checks, various dates, totaling $1,103.47

Although not noted in the Discharge Notification  Letter,  dated  3 November
1982, applicant’s records also contain the  following  documented  incidents
of misconduct:

        g. Letter of Reprimand, undated, for being in violation of AFR 35-10
           in that his moustache needed trimming, he was in need of a shave,
           and his boots were in bad repair and needed shining

        h. Letter of Counseling, dated 2  December  1981,  for  violating  a
           verbal order from an NCO and a written  order  contained  on  the
           duty roster

        i. Letter of Counseling, dated 29 January 1982, for failure to bring
           all his required equipment to duty  which  resulted  in  numerous
           personnel changes to other posts in order to allow him to  obtain
           his equipment

        j. Article 15, dated 10 May 1982,  for,  on  or  about  7 May  1982,
           without authority, failing to go at the time  prescribed  to  his
           appointed place of duty.  Punishment consisted  of  reduction  to
           the grade of airman and correctional  custody  for  a  period  of
           30 consecutive days.   Reduction  to  the  grade  of  airman  and
           correctional custody  in  excess  of  15  consecutive  days  were
           suspended until 8 November 1982

The commander advised applicant of his right to consult  legal  counsel  and
submit statements in his own behalf, and that his failure  to  do  so  would
constitute a waiver of his right to do so.

On 16 November 1982, after consulting with counsel,  applicant  elected  not
to submit statements in his own behalf.

A legal review was conducted on 18 November 1982, in which the  staff  judge
advocate  recommended  applicant  be  separated  with  a  general  discharge
characterization, without probation and rehabilitation.

On 26 November 1982, applicant was discharged in the grade of  airman  first
class (E-3) for misconduct – pattern of dishonorable  failure  to  pay  just
debts, IAW AFR 39-10, paragraph 5-47d.  He  was  given  an  under  honorable
conditions discharge characterization, and an RE Code of 2B, Separated  with
a General or UOTHC Discharge, which bars immediate reenlistment.  He  served
a total of 2 years, 9 months, and 1 day of net active service.

A resume of applicant's performance reports follows:

      PERIOD ENDING                     OVERALL EVALUATION

      25 Sep 1982                            6
      25 Sep 1981                       6
      25 Feb 1981                       5

Applicant is entitled to wear the Air Force  Training  Ribbon  and  the  Air
Force Outstanding Unit Award.

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

On 17 August 2007, a request for post-service information was  forwarded  to
the applicant for response within 30 days.  However, as  of  this  date,  no
response has been received by this office.

At the time of  the  applicant’s  discharge,  the  service  characterization
received was appropriate under the provisions of  the  governing  regulation
in effect at the time.  Attached at Exhibit E is an  excerpt  from  AFI  36-
3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, dated 9 July  2004,  which  shows
the current criteria for determining the characterization of  service  under
similar circumstances.  Additionally, notwithstanding the absence  of  error
or injustice, the Board has the prerogative to grant relief on the basis  of
clemency if so inclined.

________________________________________________________________

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 find no
evidence  of  an  error  or  injustice  that  occurred  in  the  discharge
processing.  Based on the available evidence of record,  it  appears  that
the discharge was consistent with  the  substantive  requirements  of  the
discharge regulation and within the commander’s  discretionary  authority.
The applicant has provided no evidence which would lead us to believe  the
characterization of the service was contrary  to  the  provisions  of  the
governing regulation, unduly harsh, or disproportionate  to  the  offenses
committed.  We considered  upgrading  the  discharge  based  on  clemency;
however, the applicant has not provided  any  information  concerning  his
post-service activities and accomplishments for us to conclude that he has
overcome the behavioral traits which caused the discharge, and we  do  not
find the evidence presented  is  sufficient  to  compel  us  to  recommend
granting the relief sought on that basis.  Therefore, in  the  absence  of
evidence to the contrary,  we  find  no  basis  upon  which  to  recommend
granting the relief sought.

________________________________________________________________

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-2007-02182
in Executive Session on 10 October 2007, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                       Mr. James W. Russell, III, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member
                       Mr. Clarence R. Anderegg, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 Jun 07.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, US DOJ FBI, dated 25 Jul 07.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 17 Aug 07, w/atch.
    Exhibit E.  AFI 36-3208 Extract, dated 9 Jul04.



                                   JAMES W. RUSSELL, III
                                   Panel Chair