RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2010-02211
                       INDEX CODE:  107.00
                       COUNSEL:  NONE
                       HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to reflect  award  of  the  National  Defense
Service Medal (NDSM).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He believes he is entitled to the NDSM because  he  served  on  active
duty from 2 Aug  90  through  30  Nov  95  and  was  discharged  under
honorable conditions.  Furthermore, Executive Order 12276 awarded  the
NDSM to all service members on active duty from 2 Aug 90 to  30 Nov 95
who were discharged under honorable conditions.

In support of his request, applicant provides a copy of his  DD  Form
214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.

The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 21 Sep 89, the applicant contracted  his  enlistment  in  the  Air
Force Reserve (AFRes) and was ordered to extended active  duty  as  a
staff sergeant.   On  22  Dec  89,  he  was  appointed  as  a  second
lieutenant in the AFRES.

On 19 Sep 90, his commander notified him that he was recommending his
discharge from the Air Force for  serious  or  recurring  misconduct.
The specific reason for the discharge action was on  31  Jul  90;  he
received an Article 15 for assault, adultery, solicitation  to  enter
into an adulterous relationship with a married  civilian  female  and
solicitation to enter into  an  improper  relationship  on  terms  of
military equality.

On 3 Oct 90, the applicant requested a resignation  in  lieu  of  the
discharge action.  On 19 Nov 90, the Secretary of the
Air Force approved the request for resignation in lieu  of  discharge
and directed discharge with a general discharge.  He  was  discharged
on 30 Nov 90.  He served 11 months and 9 days of active service.

The applicant  appealed  to  the  Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Board
(AFDRB), requesting a discharge upgrade to honorable.   On  28 Oct 91,
the AFDRB considered and denied his appeal.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial.  DPSIDR notes the  NDSM  is  awarded
for honorable active service as a member of the Armed  Forces  of  the
United States for any  period  27 Jun 50  to  27 Jul 54,  1 Jan 61  to
14 Aug 74, 2 Aug 90 to  30 Nov 95  and  11 Sep 01  to  a  date  to  be
determined.  During these periods, service members  in  the  following
categories are not eligible for the NDSM: (1) members of the Guard and
Reserve Forces on short tours  of  active  duty  to  fulfill  training
obligations under an inactive duty training program; (2)  any  service
member on temporary duty (TDY) or temporary active duty (TAD) to serve
on boards, courts, commissions, and  similar  organizations;  (3)  any
service member on active duty for the sole  purpose  of  undergoing  a
physical examination.  Any member of the United States Coast Guard  or
the Reserve or Guard Forces of the Armed Forces who, between  1 Jan 61
to 14 Aug 74, became eligible for award of  either  the  Armed  Forces
Expeditionary Medal (AFEM), the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM) or between
2 Aug 90 and 30 Nov 95 became eligible for award of the Southwest Asia
Service Medal (SWASM) shall be eligible for award of the NDSM.

DPSIDR further notes that due to the applicant  receiving  an  Article
15, and general discharge he is ineligible for entitlement to the NDSM
as his entire service  during  the  award  inclusive  period  was  not
honorable.

The complete AFPC/DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EALUATION:

The applicant states the  official  character  of  his  discharge  is
general, under honorable conditions and he served  within  the  dates
specified for the award.  For whatever reason the reviewer  may  have
to interpret the character of his service differently,  the  fact  is
that his character of service in the Air  Force  officially  was  and
remains honorable. The attached
Executive Orders from the President of the United States do not grant
authority to change a character of service after the fact.

Several leaders that knew him recommended him for a  fully  honorable
discharge, rather than a general. If anyone  is  to  reinterpret  his
character of service, it must be those men who served  with  him  and
knew him. They attested to his honorable service and good  character.
As far as he knows this has never happened when an  officer  resigned
with an Article 15.

He would never have tendered his resignation under any  circumstances
less than honorable!   He  was  told  that  his  discharge  would  be
considered as honorable.  He was also told that he would receive  all
of his military benefits.  He learned after he resigned that he would
not receive veteran benefits because Congress had recently  passed  a
law cancelling benefits for anyone who had not served 24 months.  His
benefits were not cancelled for bad conduct.

The applicant's complete rebuttal, with attachments, is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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 an error or injustice to warrant award of  the  NDSM.
We took notice of the applicant's complete submission, to include  his
rebuttal response, 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  our
conclusion that the applicant has failed  to  sustain  his  burden  of
proof of the existence of an error or injustice.   Therefore,  in  the
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find  no  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 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-
2010-02211 in Executive Session on 7 Dec 10, under the  provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

      , Panel Chair
      , Member
      , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 2 Apr 10, w/atch.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Military Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSIDR, dated 13 Aug 10.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Sep 10.
      Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 18 Sep 10, w/atchs.





                             Panel Chair