RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02746

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Applicant makes no contentions.  His complete application, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic on 20 August 1979.  The applicant was involuntarily discharged under the provision of AFR 39-12 (unsuitable - apathy, defective attitude) with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions) on 28 October 1981 in the grade of airman.  He served 2 years, 2 months and 9 days of active service.

The member was notified on 8 October 1981 by his commander that he was recommending applicant for a discharge for failure to maintain prescribed standards of military conduct and his poor attitude.  Specifically, on 7 September 1981, he received punishment under Article 15 for wrongful possession of marijuana; on 28 August 1981, he failed to go to his place of duty and received another Article 15; on 28 March 1980, member received a Record of Counseling for exhibiting poor attitude and unwillingness to apply himself to duties; on 5 January 1980, he received a Letter of Warning because he was present in a room where other airmen were smoking marijuana, but failed to report this to the proper authorities or leave the room.  Member consulted with counsel and furnished statements; however, review of his case file showed he made the same type of statements in response to previous incidents, but failed to improve his conduct.  For this reason, his superiors did not recommend probation and rehabilitation.  The Discharge Authority approved his discharge and ordered a general discharge.

_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial.  Based on the documentation in the file, DPPRS believes the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  Additionally, the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  Applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge proceedings.  Additionally, the applicant provided no facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge he received.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 20 September 2002, for review and comment within 30 days.  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, the Board excused the failure to timely file.

3.	Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his discharge should be upgraded to honorable.  The applicant has not established by his submission that his commander abused his discretionary authority, and since we find no abuse of that authority, there is no compelling reason to overturn the commander’s decision.  We agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force and adopt their rationale as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of having suffered either an error or an injustice.  Therefore, in absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

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 02-02746 in Executive Session on 20 November 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 7 Aug 02, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 13 Sep 02.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Sep 02.