RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00303
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He believes he was discharged six months earlier because he refused to reenlist for another four years.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits two personal statements, an excerpt from an Army Regulation Concerning Criteria for Honorable Discharges, a character reference and six certificates.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 16 February 1972.

Applicant was progressively promoted to the grade of sergeant on 1 April 1974.

APR profile since 1972 reflects the following:

	PERIOD ENDING	EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL

	 30 Nov 72	      8
	 30 Nov 73	      8
	 13 Aug 74	      7

On 22 April 1975, the commander notified the applicant that he was recommending him for a general discharge because of his frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military and civil authorities and drug abuse.  Specifically:  a Letter of Reprimand on 16 August 1974 for reading prohibited material while on duty as the Desk Sergeant; on 3 December 1974, he was convicted by a special court-martial for breaking and entering the Base Exchange on 13 October 1974 and stealing items of a value of less than $50; and on 13 October 1974, possession of hashish.  Sentence:  To be confined at hard labor for four months.  The sentence was adjudged on 3 December 1974.    After being counseled by Capt XXXXX, a qualified legal counsel, applicant waived his right to a hearing before an administrative discharge board and did not submit statements in his own behalf.  Probation and rehabilitation (P&R) were not recommended (by the Vice Commander) because the applicant had been given ample opportunities and time to rehabilitate himself, but failed to take advantage of the opportunities afforded him.  The Discharge Authority approved the discharge and ordered a general discharge without P&R.  He had 100 days of lost time due to confinement.

The applicant, while serving in the grade of airman basic, was discharged from the Air Force on 12 May 1975 under the provisions of AFM 39-12 (frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with civil and military authorities) and received an under honorable conditions (general) discharge.  He served 3 years and 28 days of total active service.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, indicated on the basis of the data furnished they were unable to locate an arrest record.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS states that they believe 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.  Therefore, they recommend denial of the applicant’s request (see Exhibit C).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states that he is not contesting the original sentence imposed under the provisions of AFM 39-12.  He fully accepts and stand accountable for his actions during this very stressful part of his life.  The punishment he received under the UCMJ was justified.  He has learned to use this punishment as a positive learning tool now and in the future for his civilian goals.  However, based on his immaculate record under his current employer, he strongly believes upgrading his discharge to honorable status is warranted.  He has requested a copy of his EPRs so that he may review any and all derogatory information for accuracy.  Applicant's complete response, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  The majority of the Board found no impropriety in the characterization of applicant’s discharge.  His contentions are noted; however, it appears that responsible officials applied appropriate standards in effecting the separation, and the majority of the Board does not find persuasive evidence that pertinent regulations were violated or that the service member was not afforded all the rights to which entitled at the time of discharge.  The Board majority noted the evidence provided by the applicant pertaining to his post service activities and does not find it sufficient to warrant relief based on clemency in the form of a fully honorable discharge.  The Board majority’s opinion in this regard is based on the seriousness of the infractions he committed against the good order and discipline of the service.  In view of the above, the Board majority finds the applicant’s service is accurately characterized as “under honorable conditions” and finds no basis upon which to recommend favorable action on this application.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD:

A majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be denied.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 8 May 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

				Vice Chair
				Member
				Member

By a majority vote, the Board recommended denial of the application.  Ms. XXXXXXX voted to correct the records and submits a Minority Report.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 Feb 03, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 25 Feb 03.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Mar 03.
	Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Response, dated 31 Mar 03, w/atchs.
	Exhibit F.  Minority Report.

					
					Vice Chair

AFBCMR BC-2003-00303

MEMORANDUM FOR THE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE REVIEW BOARDS AGENCY

SUBJECT:  Minority Report on AFBCMR Case of 

	I have carefully considered all the circumstances of this case and disagree with the majority of the panel that the applicant’s request should be denied.

	While the evidence does not support a finding that the actions taken to effect the applicant’s discharge were erroneous, I believe clemency would be appropriate in this case based on the following considerations.  The record indicates that the applicant served honorably and well for approximately two and one-half years before he committed the first offense that led to his separation.  The evidence he has provided substantiates to my satisfaction that he has made a successful post service adjustment.  He has lived with the adverse effects of his discharge for 28 years and I believe that the continued imposition of the discharge would constitute an injustice.

	In view of the above, I believe that approval of the requested relief based on clemency would be appropriate.

						
						Panel Member

AFBCMR BC-2003-00303

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD
                                       FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR)

SUBJECT:  AFBCMR Case of 

	I have carefully considered all the circumstances of this case and do not agree with the opinion of the majority of the Panel that the applicant’s request that his discharge be upgraded should be denied.

	I agree with the minority member that the applicant’s discharge should be upgraded to honorable on the basis of clemency.  The record indicates that the applicant served honorably for approximately two and one-half years before he committed the first offense that led to his separation.  The applicant, in his rebuttal, accepted responsibility and expressed contrition for his actions.  It appears that in the 28 years since his separation, he has become a useful and productive member of his community.  For these reasons, I believe the continued imposition of his current service characterization would constitute an injustice.

	Therefore, I direct that the applicant’s record be corrected to show he was honorably discharged.

						
						Director
						Air Force Review Boards Agency

AFBCMR BC-2003-00303
INDEX CODE:  110.00

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

	Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

	The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to, be corrected to show that on 12 May 1975, he was honorably discharged and furnished an Honorable Discharge certificate.

							
							Director
							Air Force Review Boards Agency