RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-04016
		INDEX CODE:  110.02

		COUNSEL:  

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He never received a discharge-separation and therefore was unaware of the type of discharge.  Applicant contends that he had to be told that he had an other than honorable discharge.

Applicant’s appeal is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 10 Jan 61.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of Airman 3rd Class (A3C/E-2) with an effective date and date of rank of   5 Apr 61.  

The applicant was found guilty on 25 Jun 62, by Summary Court Martial, of loitering on sentinel duty.  He was restricted to base for 30 days and fined $55.  On 7 September 1962, he was found guilty by Special Court Martial of stealing and attempting to steal on three different occasions.  He was confined at hard labor for 90 days, fined $50 per month for 3 months, and reduced in grade to Airman Basic (AB/E-1).  Applicant was found guilty by Summary Court Martial on 13 Feb 63 for failure to report for duty.  He was confined to 30 days of hard labor and fined $40.

On 24 Jan 63, the applicant received notification that he was being recommended for discharge due to frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military/civil authorities.  He received an undesirable discharge on 2 April 1963 under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Unfitness.  He had completed a total of 1 year, 11 months and 11 days of active service.  He also had 101 days of lost time.  He was serving in the grade of AB at the time of discharge.  His commander did not recommend Probation and Rehabilitation.

The applicant acknowledged his commander’s discharge recommendation.  He waived his right to present matters before a board and his right to a hearing but provided a statement on    13 February 1963 requesting a lesser discharge than undesirable.

The applicant appealed to the Discharge Review Board (DRB) to upgrade his discharge.  The DRB denied the applicant’s request finding no compelling reason to upgrade the discharge.  (Exhibit B)

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states that the applicant provided no new information or evidence, nor did he present facts of any errors or injustices that occurred during the processing of his discharge.  DPPRS states also that the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority and was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of discharge directives of the time.

AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 24 January 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 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 the grounds on which the initial determination of unfitness was made.  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-2002-04016 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, 16 Dec 02. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 16 Jan 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Jan 03.