RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00338
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be changed to an honorable discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was reassured that after several years his discharge would be upgraded to honorable.  He served his country faithfully for three and a half years.  He realizes the errors of his ways and regrets the shame he has caused to the country, the Air Force and himself.

The applicant did not submit any documents in support of the appeal.  Applicant's submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 21 August 1981.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class on 21 February 1983. His Airman Performance Report (APR) profile since 1982 reflects the following:

	PERIOD ENDING           EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL

	 20 Aug 82				      7
	 20 Aug 83				      9
	 16 Feb 84				      8
	 16 Feb 85				      7

On 2 May 1985, the commander notified the applicant that he was recommending a discharge for a pattern of misconduct consisting of discreditable involvement with military or civilian authorities.  He recommended a UOTHC discharge.  Misconduct included three Article 15s (31 October 1981, for larceny from the Base Exchange; 21 July 1982, for failure to go and making a false official statement; and on 14 January 1985, for failure to go).  In January 1985, the applicant had a positive urinalysis test for marijuana.  On 19 March 1985, he was court-martialed for larceny of a wristwatch and gold ring and received three months of confinement, reduction in grade and forfeiture of $200 for three months.  Additionally, he had four Letters of Reprimand for financial irresponsibility.  Applicant waived his right to a board contingent upon receipt of a general discharge.  On 16 May 1985, his commander rejected the conditional waiver.  On 21 May 1985, the applicant submitted an unconditional waiver.  The base legal services reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support the discharge and recommended acceptance.  The commander and separation authorities recommended a UOTHC discharge without probation and rehabilitation (P&R).  The Discharge Authority approved the separation and ordered a UOTHC discharge without P&R on 3 July 1985.

The applicant, while serving in the grade of airman, was discharged from the Air Force on 11 July 1985 under the provisions of AFR 39-10 (misconduct - pattern of discreditable involvement with military or civil authorities) with an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge.  He was credited with 3 years, 10 months and 21 days of total active service.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 4 April 2003, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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 error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force and adopt their rationale as the basis for the conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  The applicant has provided no evidence showing that the information contained in his discharge case file was erroneous, that his substantial rights were violated, that his commanders abused their discretionary authority, or that his service warranted a better characterization than the one he received.  The passage of time, in and of itself, does not provide an appropriate basis for recharacterization of a former member’s service characterization.  Without evidence from the applicant showing that he has maintained the standards of good citizenship since his separation, we have no basis to recommend his request for an upgrade of his discharge be granted based on clemency.  In view of the foregoing and in the absence of evidence attesting to a successful post service-adjustment, the applicant’s request is not favorably considered. 

_________________________________________________________________

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 this application in Executive Session on 28 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 27 Jan 03, w/atch.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 26 Mar 03.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Apr 03.

						
						Panel Chair