RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02506
		INDEX CODE:  110.02
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was 18 years old when he entered military service and experienced so many problems.  Both his parents became critically ill and died, and he went through a divorce.  He was going through a lot of hardships and personal problems and could not keep his military perspective.  He received an assignment to Turkey, but was determined not to go.  His assignment was cancelled because of emotional reasons.  He was not happy and wanted to get out of the service to take care of family business.  He was approved for discharge because of his problems, but was not given an honorable discharge.

Since he has left the Air Force, he has been successful in many things.  He has been married for 19 years and owns his own home.  He had his own business for 8 years, and has been a DoD employee for 18 years and is doing his best to help the soldiers succeed in their mission.  He has received many awards for his civilian service.  He has not been in any trouble with the law.  

No supporting documentation was submitted.  The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 22 April 1977, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the age of 18 in the grade airman basic (E-1) for a period of 4 years.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class (E-3) effective and with a date of rank of 22 April 1978.  The applicant received four Airman Performance Reports (APRs), in which the overall evaluations were 8, 8, 9 and 5.

21 August 1979, the applicant was counseled for failing to provide support to his wife.  He was required to immediately pay $103.00, and set up an allotment.  

On 21 September 1979, based on previous ongoing evaluation of the applicant by personnel at the Mental Health Clinic, the Chief, Mental Health Clinic initiated a Medial Statement in which he indicated the diagnostic impression was “Depressive neurosis, chronic, moderate to severe, superimposed on a personality disorder.  It was recommended that the applicant be returned to duty and continue in psychotherapy.

On 9 October 1979, the applicant received a Letter of Counseling regarding his job performance.

On 19 October 1979, the applicant was counseled regarding his then pending Permanent Change of Station assignment.  

On 22 October 1979, the applicant received Article 15 punishment for failing to report for a scheduled PCS briefing.

On 25 October 1979, action was taken to cancel the applicant’s assignment in order to initiate administrative discharge proceedings.  

On 31 October 1979, the applicant was reprimanded for twice failing to maintain his on-base quarters in a satisfactory manner.

On 21 November 1979, the applicant’s commander notified him he was recommending that he be discharged from the Air Force under AFM 39-12, Chapter 2, Section A for unsuitability.  After consulting military legal counsel, the applicant declined to submit statements on his behalf, but offered a conditional waiver of the rights associated with an administrative discharge hearing contingent upon his receipt of no less than a General Discharge certificate.  

On 11 December 1979, a legal review of the discharge case file by the staff judge advocate found the file legally sufficient and recommended the applicant be discharged with a general discharge without the opportunity for probation and rehabilitation.  On 14 December 1979, the discharge authority approved the recommendation for discharge and directed he be issued a General Discharge certificate without the opportunity for probation or rehabilitation.

On 17 December 1979, he was discharged under honorable conditions under the provisions of AFR 39-12 (Unsuitable - Personality Disorder).  He had served 2 years, 7 months, and 26 days on active duty.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provided a copy of an investigative report pertaining to the applicant (Identification Record No., which is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, and the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  DPPRS notes the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing, nor did he provide any facts warranting a change to his character of service.  DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force Evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment on 27 August 2004.  On 14 September 2004, the applicant was invited to submit information pertaining to his post-service accomplishments.  On 21 September 2004, a copy of the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) report was forwarded to the applicant.  As of this date, this office has received no response to any of the before-mentioned correspondence (Exhibit D).
_________________________________________________________________

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 careful consideration of the applicant’s request and the available evidence of record, we see no evidence that would warrant an upgrade of his discharge to honorable.  Other than his own assertions, the applicant has provided no evidence that would lead us to believe the actions taken to effect his discharge were improper, or that the information in his discharge case file is erroneous.  Additionally, the applicant has not provided evidence pertaining to his post-service activities and accomplishments to support possible favorable consideration of his request based on clemency.  Should applicant provide statements from community leaders and acquaintances attesting to his good character and reputation and other evidence of successful post-service rehabilitation, we would be willing to reconsider his request.  In the absence of such evidence or showing his discharge was erroneous or unjust at the time he was effected, we have no basis on which to favorably consider this application.

___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission 

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 1 March 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with Docket Number BC-2004-02506:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 Sep 04.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 4 Oct 04.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Aug 04 and letters, 
                 AFBCMR, dated 14 Sep 04 and 21 Sep 04.
	Exhibit E.  FBI Report.