RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-01233
								INDEX CODE:  106.00
	XXXXXXXXXXXXX				COUNSEL:  NONE

								HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  20 October 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to a General Discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The reason he was given an Article 15 was a bounced check issued to the NCO Club in the amount of $2.00, which he made good.  He was a staff sergeant (E-5) at the time and was demoted to the grade of airman first class (E-3) as a result of the Article 15. He was advised that the Article 15 would not be in his records upon completion of his duty.

When he was demoted, he spoke with the Judge Advocate’s office and advised them he was unable to support his family, and he lost his home.  He was granted a Veterans Administration (VA) home loan in 1965, and believes he has paid his dues with his NSF check as his financial records are in great standing.

He was an aircraft mechanic, was injured twice while on active duty, and received minimum coverage.  The first injury was three broken toes when a fire bottle fell on his foot while he was on the flight line, and his foot was wrapped and he was sent on his way.  He believes that as the years have passed, he is in need of getting his foot checked due to this injury.  The second injury was a jaw broken in three places when he fell across a railing within the dock area where the aircraft engines dock over the pit areas.  His medical treatment consisted of having his jaw wired for six weeks, and no further treatment is needed at this time.

He desires the ability to use VA medical treatment as he is at the age that he has been in need of medical treatment.  When he applied for VA medical benefits, he discovered his DD Form 214 stated UOTHC, and believes this to be incorrect.

In support of his appeal, he has provided copies of a personal statement, dated 17 April 2007, an NA Form 13038, Certification of Military Service, dated 13 February 2007, and a memorandum from the National Personnel Records Center, dated 15 February 2007.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant's military personnel records were apparently destroyed by fire in 1973.  Therefore, the facts surrounding his separation cannot be verified.  Data extracted from his reconstructed records reflects that he enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 27 October 1954, was discharged on 27 January 1960, and was issued a UOTHC discharge.  

Pursuant to the Board's second request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, WV, indicated that on the basis of the data furnished, they were unable to locate an arrest record (Exhibit C).  

_________________________________________________________________

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 probable error or injustice.  Based upon the presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs and without evidence to the contrary, we must assume that the applicant's discharge was proper and in compliance with appropriate directives as his limited reconstructed personnel records contain no documentation as to the circumstances leading to his discharge.  The only other basis upon which to upgrade his discharge would be based on clemency.  However, applicant has failed to provide documentation pertaining to his post-service activities.  Should he provide documentary evidence pertaining to his post-service activities we would be willing to reconsider his appeal.  In the absence of such evidence, favorable action is not recommended.  Therefore, based on the available evidence of record, we find no basis upon 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 of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2007-01233 in Executive Session on 15 August 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

				XXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair
				XXXXXXXXXX, Member
				XXXXXXXXXX, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 Apr 2007, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Reconstructed Military Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Negative FBI Reply, dated 18 Jun 07.

								XXXXXXXXXX
								Panel Chair