RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2010-02579
                       INDEX CODE:  110.00
                       COUNSEL:  NONE
                       HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

      2.  The reduction in rank imposed upon  him  under  Article  15,
Record of Nonjudicial Punishment, dated 18 Jun 92 be set aside.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He did no wrong, but was punished because of his  association  with  a
service member who used drugs.  He received a reduction  in  rank  and
was discharged.  He was  not  treated  fairly  and  was  discriminated
against.  He was pushed out of the Air Force after requesting an early
out.

In  support  of  his  request,  the  applicant  provides  a   personal
statement, DD Form 293, Application for the Review of  Discharge  from
the Armed Forces of the United States and documents extracted from his
military personnel records.

Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 23 Jul 85, the applicant contracted his initial enlistment  in  the
Regular Air Force.  He was progressively  promoted  to  the  grade  of
technical sergeant but was demoted to the grade of airman first  class
on 25 Jun 92.

On 23 Jul 92, the applicant’s  commander  notified  him  that  he  was
recommending his discharge from the Air Force  for  misconduct  (minor
disciplinary infractions.)  The specific  reasons  for  the  discharge
action were he received four Letters of Reprimand (LOR) an Article 15,
and a Letter of Indebtedness.

His commander advised him of his rights in this matter.  On 3 Aug 92,
he acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge  and,  after
consulting  with  legal  counsel,  submitted  a  conditional   waiver
contingent upon receipt of an honorable discharge.

On 20 Aug 92, he withdrew the conditional  waiver  and  submitted  an
unconditional waiver for an administrative  discharge  board  hearing
and waived his right to military counsel.   The  Acting  Staff  Judge
Advocate found  the  discharge  legally  sufficient  and  recommended
accepting the unconditional waiver and discharging the applicant with
a general (under honorable conditions)  discharge  without  probation
and rehabilitation.

On 1 Sep 92, the discharge authority  directed  a  general  discharge
without probation and rehabilitation.  He was discharged on 2 Sep 92.
 He served 7 years, 1 month and 10 days of active service.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of  Investigation
(FBI) provided a copy of an Investigative Report, which is at Exhibit
C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial with regard to  the  Article  15  action.
JAJM states the punishment imposed in the Article 15  was  appropriate
to the offense and not unfairly harsh.  A review  of  the  nonjudicial
punishment action reflects no error in the processing of  the  Article
15.  The applicant was given all of his rights throughout the process.
 He was able to present matters to  the  commander  for  consideration
before imposition of the punishment.  He was offered  the  opportunity
to appeal the decision of his commander.  His  commander  was  in  the
best position to carefully weigh all of the  evidence,  make  informed
findings of fact,  and  arrive  at  an  appropriate  punishment.   The
applicant has not provided any basis for a grant of relief with regard
to the Article 15.  Nor has he provided any evidence or other facts to
support  his  contention  regarding  being  punished  because  of  his
association with drug users or discrimination.  The applicant did  not
deny in this application and in  his  statement  in  response  to  the
Article 15 that he wrote bad checks and that he knew he did  not  have
sufficient funds.  A commander  considering  a  case  for  disposition
under Article 15 exercises largely unfettered discretion in evaluating
the case, both as to whether punishment is warranted and,  the  nature
and extent of the punishment.

The complete AFLOA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 13 Oct 10, copies of the investigative report and  the  Air  Force
evaluation were forwarded to the applicant for his review and comment
within 30 days, along with a request for documentation regarding  his
activities since leaving military service (Exhibit D).

In his response the applicant indicates that he took notes during the
period in question and the circumstances of his  situation  were  not
what the Air Force evaluation reflects.  He states he received a  LOR
and not a Article 15.  He believes he was misguided, ill advised  and
treated unfairly.  He was  suffering  financial  difficulty  when  he
returned from Desert Storm and did  not  know  that  requesting  help
would result in him being discharged.  He  also  indicated  he  would
provide documentation for consideration of clemency (Exhibit F).   As
of  this  date,  this  office   has   not   received   the   clemency
documentation.

_________________________________________________________________

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; to include his response,  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  and  the
nonjudicial punishment action  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  and
nonjudicial punishment was contrary to the provisions of the governing
regulation,  unduly  harsh,  or  disproportionate  to   the   offenses
committed.   However,  should  the  applicant  provide   documentation
pertaining to his post-service accomplishments  and  activities,  this
Board  would  be  willing  to  review  the  materials   for   possible
reconsideration of his request based on clemency.  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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2010-02579 in Executive Session  on  16  and  29  Nov  10,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            , Panel Chair
            , Member
            , Member

The following documentary was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 Jul 10, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. FBI Investigative Report
      Exhibit D. Letter, HQ AFLOA/JAJM, dated 31 Aug 10.
      Exhibit E. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 13 Oct 10, w/atch.
      Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 11 Nov 10.





                             Panel Chair