RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02863

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

At the time he was misadvised by his first sergeant, who encouraged him to get out.  He was not informed of his options to remain in the military.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic on 5 July 1972.  The commander recommended the applicant be discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-12 (Unsuitable – Apathy, Defective Attitude) with service characterized general (under honorable conditions) on 26 March 1974 in the grade of airman.  He served 1 year, 8 months and 19 days of total active military service.

On 21 February 1974, the applicant’s commander notified him he was recommending him for a general discharge for defective attitude and inability to expend effort constructively.  Basis for action was: Article 15, 4 April 1973, wrongfully giving his identification card to another person, with intend to deceive, punishment included reduction to airman basic (suspended) and forfeiture of $50 per month for 2 months (suspended to 1 month): Article 15, 23 November 1973, absent without leave, reduced to airman (suspended), forfeiture of  $75 per month for two months and seven days correctional custody; and Letter of Reprimand,   24 October 1973, failure to go to prescribed duty and disobeying a lawful order on 12 October 1973.  His commander and supervisor counseled him numerous times for unsatisfactory duty performance.  Applicant consulted with legal counsel and was advised of his rights.  He was not board entitled but was interviewed by an investigating officer, on 28 February 1974, who found the member was concerned about facing discharge action, but appeared “lackadaisical” and indifferent.  After reviewing the member’s record of non-judicial punishment, counselings and his latest Airman Performance Report along with comments from the member’s commander, the investigating officer recommended a general discharge without probation and rehabilitation (P&R). Applicant did not submit statements on his own behalf.  The base legal services reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support the discharge.  Upon review of the case and recommendations, the Discharge Authority ordered a general (under honorable conditions) discharge without P&R on 22 March 1974.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial and stated that based upon documentation in file, 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.  Additionally, he provided no other facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge.  He has not filed a timely request.

AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 3 October 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, the Board excused the failure to timely file.

3.	Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice warranting an upgrade in his discharge.  The records reflect that the commander initiated administrative actions based on information he determined to be reliable and that administrative actions were properly accomplished.  The applicant was afforded all rights granted by statute and regulation.  We are not persuaded by the evidence presented that the commander abused his discretionary authority when he initiated the discharge action.  The only other basis upon which to recommend an upgrade of his discharge would be clemency.  However, applicant has failed to provide documentation pertaining to his post service conduct.  Should he provide statements from community leaders and acquaintances attesting to his good character and reputation and other evidence of successful post-service rehabilitation, this Board will reconsider this case based on the new evidence.  Therefore, in the absence of this documentation, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in 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.

_________________________________________________________________

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-2003-02863 in Executive Session on 13 November 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 22 Sep 03.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 24 Sep 03.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Oct 03.