RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-02371
                                             INDEX CODE:  106.00
      XXXXXXXXXXXXX                     COUNSEL:  NONE

                                             HEARING DESIRED:  YES


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  24 January 2009


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Separation Code (SPD)  be  changed  to  “KBK”  (Completion  of  Required
Active Service) and his Reenlistment Eligibility (RE)  Code  be  changed  to
“1J” (Eligible to reenlist, but elects separation).

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

At the time of his misconduct, he was youthful and indignant.  He has  lived
with this failure for years, and  feels  that  this  has  haunted  him  long
enough.

He is interested in working for government contractors and,  if  hired,  may
be required to obtain security clearances.

In support of his appeal, he  has  provided  copies  of  numerous  custodial
documents relating to his son, his FAA Pilots  License,  numerous  documents
pertaining  to  his  certification  as  a  Pharmacy   Technician,   numerous
documents  pertaining  to  his  participation  in  the  Student   Government
Association at Texas Southern University (TSU), his TSU Bachelor of  Science
Degree in Airway Science certificate, a document of congratulations for  his
achievement in college studies from the Missouri City Church of Christ,  two
letters  of  recommendations,  miscellaneous  documents  pertaining  to  his
aviation activities, and a photograph.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Air Force Reserve for a period  of  six  years
on 14 February 1985, and began his active duty for training (Basic  Military
Training and Technical Training) on 26 March 1985.

While attending Technical Training for Aircrew Egress  Systems  Mechanic  at
Chanute AFB, IL, the applicant was arraigned and tried by a  Special  Court-
Martial on 15 July 1985.  He pleaded not  guilty  to  the  specification  of
larceny of property of a value of $279.00 on 5 July 1985, but guilty to  the
charge and lesser included offense of wrongful appropriation.  He was  found
guilty of the specification of larceny of property of a value of $279.00  on
5 July 1985, and was sentenced to a reduction  in  grade  to  the  grade  of
airman basic (E-1), forfeiture of $279.00 per  month  for  two  months,  and
confinement for one month.

Applicant was discharged on 3 September 1985 in the grade  of  airman  basic
(E-1)  with  an  Entry  Level   separation   and   uncharacterized   service
characterization.  He was given  an  SPD  Code  of  “JKQ”  (Misconduct-Other
Serious Offenses) and an RE Code of “2C”  (Entry  level  separation  without
characterization of service).  He completed a total of 5 months and  8  days
of net active service.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation  (FBI),
Clarksburg, WV, provided a copy of  an  Investigation  Report  which  is  at
Exhibit C.  On 6 September 2007, a copy of the FBI report was  forwarded  to
the applicant, for review and comment within 30 days.  However, as  of  this
date, no response has been received by this office.

On 6 September 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, 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  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
discharge was contrary to the  provisions  of  the  governing  regulation,
unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses committed, and an  Entry
Level Separation, uncharacterized character of service,  and  RE  Code  of
“2C” are correct and in accordance with DoD and  Air  Force  instructions.
Given that the applicant’s misconduct resulted in a finding of guilty by a
Special  Court-Martial,  his  SPD  of  “JKQ”  is  also  appropriate.    We
considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, 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.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been  shown
that a personal appearance with or without counsel will  materially  add  to
our understanding of the issue(s) involved.  Therefore, the  request  for  a
hearing is not favorably considered.

________________________________________________________________

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-2007-02371
in Executive Session on 25 October 2007, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                       Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Karen A. Holloman, Member
                       Mr. Wallace F. Beard, Jr., Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, 12 Jul 07, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  USDOJ FBI Report, dated 14 Aug 07.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 6 Sep 07, w/atchs.
    Exhibit E.  AFI 36-3208 Extracts, dated 9 Jul 04.




                                   KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
                                   Panel Chair