RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-03411
                                             INDEX CODE:  106.00
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXX                    COUNSEL:  NONE

                                             HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Certain allegations were made by an airman with whom he once had a  personal
relationship, and were stated in an attempt to discredit him when they  were
no longer intimate.  The allegations were  unfounded  and  hearsay,  and  he
asks that they be discounted.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force  on  28  January  1985,  and
served  as  an  apprentice  construction  equipment   operator   until   his
discharge.

Although not  used  as  a  basis  for  discharge,  the  applicant’s  records
indicate that he received an Article 15  for,  on  or  about  30  May  1985,
failing to obey a lawful order to return to a designated  building  by  2200
hours, and for, on or about 30 May 1985, wrongfully  using  the  reproachful
words  “F---  you”,  or  words  to  that  effect,  towards  another  airman.
Punishment  consisted  of  forfeiture  of  $130.00  pay   for   one   month,
restriction to the limits of Fort Leonard Wood,  MO,  for  seven  days,  and
seven days extra duties.

On 14 May 1986, the applicant was notified  of  his  commander's  intent  to
recommend him for a general discharge for misconduct.

The commander stated the  following  reasons  for  the  proposed  discharge:


        a. On 28 September 1985, he assaulted another  military  member  for
           which he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR).

        b. On 8 October 1985, he failed to obey a  lawful  order  by  having
           alcoholic beverages in his  dorm  room  while  knowing  that  his
           roommate was under the age of 21, for which he received an LOR.


        c. On 24 February 1986, he unlawfully entered the dormitory room  of
           a female airman, for which he received an Article 15.  Punishment
           consisted of a suspended reduction to the grade of  airman  basic
           (E-1),  forfeiture  of  $200.00  for  one  month,  and  30   days
           correctional custody, later suspended.

        d. On 24 April 1986, he again failed  to  obey  a  lawful  order  by
           having alcoholic beverages in his dorm room  while  knowing  that
           his roommate was under the age of 21.   For  this  incident,  his
           suspended reduction to  the  grade  of  airman  basic  (E-1)  was
           vacated.

The commander advised the 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 15 May 1986, after consulting with  counsel,  the  applicant  waived  his
right to submit statements in his own behalf.

A legal review was conducted on 27  May  1986,  in  which  the  staff  judge
advocate noted the applicant’s repeated misconduct  demonstrated  a  failure
to conform to Air  Force  standards  and  clearly  outweighed  any  positive
aspects of his military record, and that a general discharge  was  therefore
appropriate.  He recommended that he  be  separated  without  probation  and
rehabilitation, and he be furnished a general discharge certificate.

On 30 May 1986, the applicant was discharged in the grade  of  airman  basic
(E-1) under the provisions of AFR 39-10,  paragraph  5-47b,  for  a  pattern
misconduct  prejudicial  to  good  order  and  discipline,  with  an   under
honorable conditions (general) service characterization.  He served a  total
of 1 year, 4 months, and 3 days of net active service

The applicant received one Airman Performance Report (APR),  closing  on  27
Jan 1986, with an overall rating of “8”.

The applicant’s records indicate he  is  entitled  to  wear  the  Air  Force
Training Ribbon.

On  20  December  1996,  the  Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Board   (AFDRB)
considered and denied the applicant’s request to upgrade  his  discharge  to
honorable.  The AFDRB determined  the  discharge  was  consistent  with  the
procedural and substantive requirements of  the  discharge  regulation,  was
within the discretion of the discharge  authority,  and  the  applicant  was
afforded full administrative due process.

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 2 January 2008, a copy of the FBI report and  a  request  for
post-service information were forwarded to  the  applicant  for  review  and
comment within 30 days.  However, as of this  date,  no  response  has  been
received by this office.

_______________________________________________________________

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
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, 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-2007-03411
in Executive Session on 21 February 2008, under the provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                       Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Lea Gallogly, Member
                       Mr. Joseph D. Yount, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Oct 07.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Available Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  USDOJ FBI Report, dated 28 Nov 07.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 2 Jan 08, w/atchs.





                                   WAYNE R. GRACIE
                                   Panel Chair