RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-03004
		INDEX CODE:  110.02

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general, under other than honorable conditions, discharge be upgraded to honorable.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He relocated to be closer to his terminally ill father and found the trip to his unit to attend Unit Training Assembly’s (UTA’s) too far to drive.  He tried to get permission from his unit to transfer to an Air National Guard (ANG) unit in Jackson, MS that would enable him to continue his ANG career.

He contends that the type of discharge he received was unfair and that, because of his exemplary service prior to his discharge, it should be upgraded.

His submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his enlistment in the Arkansas Air National Guard (AR ANG) on 5 December 1992.  He attained the rank of Senior Airman (SRA/E-4).

Beginning in May 1994, he accumulated up to 20 unexcused absences by not attending Unit Training Assembly’s (UTA’s).  Applicant was warned of an impending demotion in grade from SRA to Airman First Class (A1C/E-3) as a result of his non-participation.  Applicant was demoted to A1C with an effective and date of rank of        25 October 1994.  

He continued to miss UTA’s and subsequently was warned of impending discharge action several times by return receipt letter.  His commander, notified him on 15 October 1994, that he was being recommended for discharge with a General, Under Honorable Conditions, discharge and transferal to the Individual Ready reserve (IRR).

On 3 December 1994, applicant was discharged under the auspices of AFI 36-3209, Unsatisfactory Participation (missed UTA's).  He had completed 2 years, 5 months and 27 days of service and was serving in the grade of A1C at the time of discharge.  

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ ANG/DPFP recommends denial.  They note that while the applicant alleges that he tried to transfer to the Mississippi ANG in order to continue to serve, DPFP’s findings were contrary to the applicant’s assertions.  DPFP notes also that based on the discharge record from the AR ANG, the applicant amassed over 20 unexcused absences during a four-month period.  AFI 36-3209 allows this type of discharge action when the member accumulates 9 or more unexcused absences within a 12-month period.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 7 March 2003 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, there has been no response 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 the failure to timely file.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice warranting an upgrade of the applicant’s discharge.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case to include his declaration of extreme family hardship; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air National Guard 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.  Other than his own assertions, the applicant has provided no evidence which would lead us to believe that the information contained in the discharge case file is erroneous, that he was not afforded all the rights to which he was entitled, or that his commanders abused their discretionary authority.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.  

_________________________________________________________________

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-2002-03004 in Executive Session on 20 May 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 Sep 02, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter,HQ ANG/DPFP, dated 22 Jan 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Mar 2003.