RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01751

	 	COUNSEL:  NONE

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_____________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He admits to making a rash decision as a young airman and now knows what can happen when action is taken without thought.

The applicant states that the incident spiraled to a bad end and destroyed an otherwise excellent service record.  He desires to have his discharge upgraded so that he may be able to serve as a Reservist.

In support of the appeal, the applicant submits documentation regarding his job performance.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 11 February 1987, for a period of six years.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of sergeant.

On 22 August 1991, the commander notified him that he was recommending his administrative discharge under the provisions of AFR 39-10, paragraph 5.47b, for a pattern of minor disciplinary infractions.  The commander indicated the following reasons for the action:

	a.	His failure to obey a lawful order to inprocess at Correctional Custody and wrongfully arguing with a superior Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) to the point of becoming combative, for which he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR), dated 20 August 1991.

	b.	He committed assault upon a female by threatening her with a knife, for which he received an Article 15 on 9 August 1991, with nonjudicial punishment consisting of reduction to the grade of airman first class, 30 days correctional custody, and a reprimand.

He consulted with military counsel and submitted statements in his behalf.  After reviewing the case and his submission, the discharge authority ordered a general discharge, without probation and rehabilitation.

On 23 September 1991, he was separated under the provisions of AFR 39-10 (Misconduct - Pattern of Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline) and received a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.  He was assigned an RE code of “2B” (Involuntarily separated with a general or under other than honorable conditions discharge.”  He completed 4 years, 7 months, and 13 days of active service.

The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge on 7 March 1995.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, and 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.  In addition, he provided no other facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge.

The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 27 June 2003 for review and response within 30 days.  However, 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.  After thoroughly reviewing the available evidence of record and noting the applicant’s complete submission, we find no evidence of an error or injustice.  In this respect, we note that the discharge appears to be in compliance with the governing regulation in effect at the time of his separation.  He has provided no evidence to indicate that his separation was inappropriate.  Absent persuasive evidence he was denied rights to which entitled, appropriate regulations were not followed, or appropriate standards were not applied, we find no basis to disturb the existing record.

_________________________________________________________________

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 Docket Number BC-2003-01751 in Executive Session on 17 September 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 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