RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-03687
		INDEX CODE:  110.02
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was young and immature when he entered the service.  After he came home from Vietnam he began to drink heavily and went Absent Without Leave on two (2) different occasions.  He drank heavily to deal with his mortality.  He is now 57 years old and realizes how his past has affected his future.  He has matured and realizes that he would like to have his discharge upgraded. 

In support of his request the applicant provides a personal statement, copy of his DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge and a copy of his Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal From the Armed Forces of the United States. 

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 18 August 1964, the applicant enlisted in the United States Air Force.  On 14 December 1967, the applicant was discharged with an under other than honorable conditions discharge under the provisions of Air Force Regulation 39-21 (Attrition, Unsuitability - Character and Behavior).  He served 3 years, 3 months and 27 days of total active service with no time lost.   

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force. 

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied.  DPPRS states that the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in his discharge process.  Based upon the documentation in his records, DPPRS believes the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation (see Exhibit C).
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 5 April 2002 for review and response.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

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.  After careful consideration of the applicant’s request and the available evidence of record, we see no evidence of an error or injustice that would warrant corrective action.  Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  The only other basis upon which to upgrade his discharge would be based on clemency.  However, the applicant has failed to provide documentation pertaining to his post-service activities.  Should he provide documentary evidence pertaining to his post-service activities we would be willing to reconsider his appeal.  In the absence of such evidence, favorable action is not recommended. 

___________________________________________________________________

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 this application AFBCMR Docket Number 01-03687 in Executive Session on 29 May 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 February 2002 w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 21 March 2002.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 April 2002.