RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02324
		INDEX CODE 110.00
		COUNSEL:  NO

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

While he was in service at a young age, he began drinking which caused many problems.  However, his problems still continued even after discharge.  He has been through three rehabs and now has been clean for 12 years.  He is married and runs his own business.  He would like to straighten up the wreckage of his past.  Since his discharged, he has worked at an alcohol drug rehab for 8 1/2 years as a substance abuse counselor.  He presently supervises three crews of men in the construction field.  They travel a lot and he constantly preachs to them how to keep their lives straighten out due to his own experiences. He is deeply sorry for his actions.

In support of his application, he submits a personal statement and a resume.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic on 17 May 1982 for a period of 4 years.  He was discharged from the Air Force on 11 October 1985 under the provisions of AFR 39-10 (conviction by court martial) and received a bad conduct discharge.  He served 3 years, 4 months and 25 days total active service. 

On 5 February 1985, the applicant was tried by a general court-martial and found guilty of 5 counts of larceny, 13 counts of breaking and entering, 1 count of entering into a dwelling with intent to commit a criminal offense and giving a false statement under oath.  The applicant was found guilty and sentenced to a BCD, confinement for 5 months, forfeiture of $397 per month for 6 months, and reduction to E-1.  The member underwent Appellate Review process and his BCD was upheld.  Sentence was adjudged and his discharge ordered on 11 October 1985.  He had 77 days lost time and 155 days excess leave.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial.  Based upon the documentation in the file, DPPRS believes the discharge was consistent with procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation at that time.  DPPRS believes the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  Additionally, the applicant provided no facts warranting an upgrade of his discharge.  He has not filed a timely request.

AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 16 August 2002, for review and comment.  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 that failure to timely file.

3.	Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice.  After a general court-martial for numerous offenses, the applicant was discharged with a bad conduct discharge.  It appears that the responsible officials applied appropriate standards in effecting the discharge, and the applicant has not provided persuasive evidence that pertinent regulations were violated or that he was not afforded all the rights to which he was entitled. The applicant has failed to sustain his burden of demonstrating he suffered either an error or an injustice and we conclude that no basis exist to recommend favorable action on his request.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable 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 02-02324 in Executive Session on 3 October 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 19 Jul 02, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, DPPRS, 6 Aug 02.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 Aug 02.