RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02217
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general discharge be upgraded to honorable.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The reasons the applicant believes the records to be in error or unjust and the evidence submitted in support of the appeal are at Exhibit A.

In support of his request, the applicant submits an Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States (DD Form 293) and a copy of his National General Grand Masonic Congress, Inc. membership card.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 8 Dec 87.

On 25 Mar 91, the applicant received notification that he was being recommended for discharge for misconduct - discreditable involvement with military or civil authorities.  He received a general discharge on 29 Mar 91 under the provisions of AFR 39-10 (misconduct - pattern of discreditable involvement with military or civil authorities).  He had completed a total of 3 years, 3 months and 22 days and was serving in the grade of airman first class (E-3) at the time of discharge.

Applicant's request for upgrade of his discharge to honorable was denied by the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) on 20 Aug 91.  A copy of the AFDRB Hearing Record is appended at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied.  Based upon the documentation in the file, DPPRS believes the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  DPPRS stated that the applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  He provided no other facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge.

The HQ AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and indicated that the reason why he stayed in financial difficulty during his overseas tour in Germany was because he disliked the food in the “chow hall” and would eat off-base all the time, which caused him to overextend his funds.  He also provided an explanation concerning the forged signatures while assigned at Dyess AFB, TX.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit F.
_________________________________________________________________

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 probable error or injustice.  We thoroughly reviewed applicant’s entire record and the circumstances surrounding the discharge.  In this respect, we found no evidence that responsible officials applied inappropriate standards in effecting the applicant’s discharge, that pertinent Air Force regulations were violated or that the applicant was not afforded all the rights to which entitled at the time of discharge.  In view of the above and in the absence of evidence that the applicant’s substantial rights were violated, that the information contained in the discharge case file was erroneous, or that his superiors abused their discretionary authority, we are not inclined to favorably consider his request for upgrade of his discharge.
_________________________________________________________________

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 02‑02217 in Executive Session on 24 September 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 Jul 02, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  AFDRB Hearing Record, dated 20 Aug 91.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 1 Aug 02.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Aug 02.
   Exhibit F.  Letter from Applicant, dated 31 Aug 02.