RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02742
		INDEX NUMBER:  110.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He has been a fire fighter for the city of Hartford, CT, from March 1987 to present.  

Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant served in the Regular Air Force from 4 May 77 to 14 Aug 85.  He entered his last enlistment on 4 Jun 82.  His highest grade held was sergeant. 

Applicant’s record reflects he received four Article 15 punishments:

On 1 Feb 79, for disobeying a lawful order of a superior commissioned officer to have his dormitory room in inspection order; punishment imposed was restriction to base for seven days.

On 26 Jun 80, for stealing a Ration Control Plate and using the Ration Control Plate made out in the name of another individual; punishment imposed was reduction in grade to airman first class, a 45-day restriction to base, and suspended forfeiture of $200 pay per month for two months.

On 7 Oct 80, for violation of a lawful general regulation, by selling duty-free goods to persons not authorized duty-free import privileges; punishment imposed was a suspended reduction in grade to airman, and forfeiture of $200.00 pay per month for two months.

On 15 Apr 85, for failure to go at the prescribed time to his appointed place of duty; punishment imposed was a suspended reduction in grade to airman first class, and forfeiture of $150.00 pay per month for two months.

Effective 1 May 85, applicant’s NCO status was vacated due to court-martial charges having been preferred.

On 22 May 85, after consulting with counsel, applicant requested discharge from the Air Force in lieu of trial by court-martial.  He acknowledged understanding the elements of the offenses with which he was charged, including a letter from the base hospital indicating his urine sample on 22 Jan 85 tested positive for the presence of THC and cocaine.

On 14 Aug 85, applicant was discharged in the grade of senior airman, under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Chapter 4, by reason of request for discharge in lieu of court martial, with service characterized as under other than honorable conditions.  He was credited with 3 years, 2 months, and 11 days of active military service during this enlistment.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS reviewed this application and recommended denial.  Based on documentation in his master personnel records, the discharge was correct and within the discretion of the discharge authority.  The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  
Addtionally, the applicant provided no facts warranting a change to his character of service.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 22 Oct 04 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.  (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 review of the available records, the applicant's discharge appears to be in compliance with the governing regulation and we find no evidence to indicate that his separation from the Air Force was inappropriate.  We find no evidence of error in this case and after reviewing the documentation submitted in support of applicant’s appeal, we do not believe he has suffered from an injustice.  Therefore, based on the available evidence of record, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider this application.

4.  Notwithstanding the above, we note the applicant has not provided any information concerning his activities since leaving the service.  Should he submit post-service documentation, the Board may be willing to reconsider his appeal as a matter of clemency.  

5.  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 issue(s) 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 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‑2004-02742 in Executive Session on 7 December 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 Aug 04.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 20 Oct 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Oct 04.