RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-03800
		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:

The Veterans Administration (VA) requested a change from an under honorable conditions discharge to honorable. 

Applicant's appeal is attached at Exhibit A.
___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 24 February 1957.  He was promoted to the grade of Airman 3rd Class (A3C/E-2) with an effective and date of rank of 11 May 1957.

On 6 February 1959, the applicant was convicted of disturbing the peace and spent 6 days in civil confinement from 20 to 25 February 1959.  He received an Article 15 on 30 June 1959 for not reporting to duty and received two hours extra duty.  On 20 March 1960, he received another Article 15 for not reporting to duty and was reduced in grade to Basic Airman (E-1).  On 9 May 1960, he received his third Article 15 for not reporting to duty and received 2 hours extra duty for two weeks.  The applicant’s record also contains several letters of indebtedness from both civil and military authorities over the period of several years as well as records of multiple counseling sessions regarding the applicant’s financial misconduct.

On 15 June 1960, the applicant was notified that he was being recommended for discharge due to the Air Force considering him unfit to serve further.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge action and waived his right to present statements to a board.  He received a general discharge on 6 July 1960 under the provisions of AFR 39-17 (Unfitness).  The applicant was not recommended for probation and rehabilitation.  He had completed three (3) years, four (4) months and thirteen (13) days and was serving in the grade of Basic Airman at the time of discharge.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states that based on documentation in the applicant’s file, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation at the time.  DPPRS states that the applicant submitted no new evidence nor did he identify any errors in the processing of his discharge.  There were no facts presented warranting a change of the applicant’s discharge.  DPPRS noted also that the request was not timely.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 3 January 2003 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, 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.  After careful consideration of the available evidence, we found no indication that the actions taken to affect applicant’s discharge for unfitness were improper or contrary to the provisions of the governing regulations in effect at the time.  In addition, we are not persuaded that the characterization of the applicant’s discharge warrants an upgrade to honorable based on the evidence of record regarding financial mismanagement and three instances of nonjudicial punishment.  Having found no error or injustice with regard to the actions that occurred while the applicant was a military member, we conclude that no basis exists to grant favorable action on his request. 

___________________________________________________________________

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-2002-03800 in Executive Session on 23 April 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Dec 02, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 19 Dec 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Jan 03.