RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01032

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable, the reason for discharge changed to “Convenience of the Government, the Separation Program Designator (SPD) changed accordingly, and his reenlistment eligibility code (RE) changed to RE-1.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

When he entered the Air Force, he was very young and immature.  He really thought he was trying to escape his life.  He had been abused and neglected by his parents during his childhood and removed from their care.  He was raised in foster care, he did not really understand what was happening to him, and he didn’t have the coping skills to deal with all of the emotions that he felt.  He began using alcohol and drugs to mask the emotional problems he was having.  The combination of those factors and his youth and immaturity prevented him from making sound judgments.

When he was stationed in Florida, he found out that his father was also living in the state.  Given his placement in foster care, he had many questions in his mind that needed answering.  He went AWOL twice to see his father because he couldn’t bear knowing he was not far away.  His emotional volatility, alcohol and substance abuse, and immaturity really clouded his judgment.  At that time, his commander gave him two choices, to go to a retraining brigade or be discharged.  He could hardly manage his life at that time and really was too immature to recognize the consequences of that choice. Now that he is older and more mature and had many years to reflect back on it, he really regrets his actions and wished someone had reached out to him and offered him some type of help at that time.  Although he takes full responsibility for his irresponsible behavior back then, he thinks the punishment he received was too severe compared with today’s standards.

He apologizes that it has taken so long since his discharge for this request, but he had no idea that he could request consideration for an upgrade of his discharge and only recently found out when he met with a social worker that also happened to be a veteran.

In support of his request, he submits a personal letter, a copy of his DD Form 214 and letters of support from co-workers.

Applicant’s complete application, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic on 28 May 1971.  On 22 May 1981, he was involuntarily discharged under the provision of AFR 39-12 (frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with civil and military authorities) with service characterized as under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC), with a RE code, in the grade of airman basic.  He served one year, six months and nine days of total active military service.

On 20 November 1972, his commander notified the applicant that he was recommending him for a discharge because of his frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities.  His records indicate he was involved in numerous incidents that required continual documented counselings and administrative actions.  He was placed on the control roster for failure to meet standards, unclean uniforms, failure to perform assigned duties and unsanitary personal hygiene.  He received three Articles 15:  10 November 1971, 31 August 72, and 14 October 1972, for being absent without leave and leaving his place of duty without permission.  In November 1971, he was reduced to AB (suspended), forfeited $30 and 14 days extra duty; in August 1972, he was reduced to AB and forfeited $75; and in October 1972, he was ordered to correctional custody for 30 days and forfeited $125 per month for two months.  Applicant consulted with counsel on  21 November 1972 and waived his right to appear before a Board of Officers or submit statements in his behalf.  The base legal services reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support discharge.  Probation and Rehabilitation (P&R) were not recommended.  The Discharge Authority approved the discharge and ordered an UOTCH discharge without P&R.  

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial.  Based on the documentation in the file, DPPRS believes 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.  Separation for the “Convenience of the Government” is generic term used to describe a number of voluntary and involuntary separations and these separations have their own SPD code and narrative reason.  Applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge proceedings.  The applicant provided no facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge.

AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAE stated that the Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code 2, “Ineligible to reenlist in the Regular Air Force” is correct.  The applicant’s request should be denied.  He received the proper RE code upon discharge.  

AFPC/DPPAE complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 4 June 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 an error or injustice.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his discharge, narrative reason for separation and RE code should be upgraded or changed.  Applicant’s contentions and supporting statements were duly noted; however, we do not find these assertions, in and by themselves, sufficiently persuasive to override the evidence of record.  We agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force and adopt their rationale as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of having suffered either an error or an injustice.   Therefore, in absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of a 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 Docket Number BC-2003-01032 in Executive Session on 29 July 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

			Panel Chair
			Member
			Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 17 Mar 03, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 15 Apr 03.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 3 Jun 03.
	Exhibit E.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Jun 03.

	
	Panel Chair