RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01727
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general discharge be upgraded to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

All records on file with Headquarters Personnel Center, St Louis, and the Department of Veterans Affairs list character of service as honorable.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits copies of two DD Forms 214.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 14 August 1972 for a period of four years.  This enlistment was subsequently extended and, on 18 November 1976, he was honorably discharged in the grade of sergeant (E-4) to reenlist.  At that time, he was credited with four years, three months and five days of active duty.  The applicant reenlisted on 19 November 1976 for a period of four years.

During the applicant’s service, he received seven Enlisted Performance Reports (EPRs), in which the overall evaluations (scale of 1-9, 9 being the highest rating) were 6, 8, 9, 9, 8, 8, and 5.

On 7 December 1978, the commander notified the applicant that he was recommending a general discharge for failure to demonstrate qualities of leadership required for the applicant’s grade and failure to maintain military deportment in bearing and behavior.  Basis for action was that the applicant was counseled numerous times for conduct unbecoming a noncommissioned officer by being involved in public disturbances at various facilities on base, spousal abuse and involvement in several domestic disturbances in base housing, threatening behavior, failure to go to official appointments, and poor duty performance; and nonjudicial punishments under Article 15, dated 11 May 1978 and 13 September 1978, for being absent without authority from duty and threatening to injure another airman.  On 11 December 1978, the applicant submitted a conditional waiver to an administrative discharge board contingent upon receipt no less than a general discharge.  The staff judge advocate reviewed the case and determined it was legally sufficient to support the discharge.  Probation and rehabilitation (P&R) were not recommended.  The Discharge Authority approved the separation and ordered a general discharge without P&R on 21 December 1978.

The applicant, while serving in the grade of sergeant (E-4), was discharged from the Air Force on 21 December 1976 under the provisions of AFR 39-12 (Board Waiver) with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.  He had served two years, one month and three days of his last four-year enlistment and was credited with six years, four months and eight 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.  The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant’s request.

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 27 June 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.  The applicant’s contentions are noted.  However, the reasons involuntary discharge proceedings were initiated in his case are well-documented in the record.  There is no indication that the information in the discharge case file was erroneous, that the applicant’s substantial rights were violated, or that his commanders abused their discretionary authority.  To the contrary, upon being advised of his right to a hearing before an Administrative Discharge Board, the applicant waived this right contingent upon his receipt of no less than a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.  In view of the above and in the absence of any evidence by the applicant showing his discharge was erroneous or unjust, or that he has made a successful post service adjustment, thereby warranting clemency in his case, we have no basis on which to favorably consider 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 this application, BC-2003-01727, in Executive Session on 14 August 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 14 May 03, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 23 Jun 03.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Jun 03.

					Panel Chair