RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:	BC-2008-02967 INDEX CODE:	110.00
COUNSEL:	NONE HEARING DESIRED:	NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was young and immature and regrets all the mistakes he made. He is requesting an upgrade of his discharge so that he may serve his country.

In support of his appeal, applicant submitted a personal statement and character references.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 10 Jul 01, the applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force.

On 21 Feb 03, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for misconduct (minor disciplinary infractions). The specific reasons for the discharge action were:

a.	On 1 Jun 02, he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for failing to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty.

b.	On 17 Jul 02, he received an LOR for failing to go at the prescribed time to a mandatory appointment.

c.	On 30 Jul 02, he received an Article 15 for sleeping on his post.
a.	

d.	On	30	Sep	02,	he	received	an	LOR	for	failing	to	
maintain	his	dorm room in inspection order.				
e.	On 5 Nov 02, he received an LOR for failing to respond to an exercise.

f.	On 5 Jan 03, he received a Letter of Counseling for failing to get his flightline drivers license.

g.	On 15 Jan 03, he received an LOR for failing to get his flightline drivers license.

h.	On 12 Feb 03, he received an Article 15 for leaving his place of duty without authority.

His commander advised him of his rights in this matter.
The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification and after consulting with legal counsel submitted a statement in his own behalf.

On 6 Mar 03, the staff judge advocate reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support separation and recommended a general discharge without probation and rehabilitation.

On 7 Mar 03, the discharge authority directed discharge with a general discharge.

The applicant was discharged on 11 Mar 03. He served one year, eight months and two days on active duty.

The applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his general discharge be upgraded to honorable, change to the reason for discharge and change of his reentry code. On 27 Dec 07, the AFDRB reviewed and considered all the facts of record and after a thorough deliberation concluded that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirement of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and that he was provided full administrative due process. The AFDRB concluded that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of his discharge.

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

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. DPSOS states the applicant's desire to serve his country is admirable, however, he did not provide any evidence of an error injustice to warrant a change in discharge characterization. Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge, to include his characterization of service, was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge manual and was within the discretion of the discharge authority.

AFPC/DPSOS’ complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 21 Nov 08, for review and response 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, 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 an error or an injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and the recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof of the existence of either an error or injustice. We note the applicant's desire to reenter military service and serve his country. While the assigned reentry code may prevent his immediate reenlistment, if a respective branch of service desires to allow his entry, a waiver may be obtained. However, approval of such would depend upon the needs of the particular branch of service. Therefore, in view of the above, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2008-02967 in Executive Session on 10 Feb 09 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

Panel Chair 
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 31 Jul 08, w/atchs.
Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Military Personnel Records. Exhibit C.	FBI Negative Reply, dated 5 Dec 08.
Exhibit D.	Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 24 Oct 08. Exhibit E.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Nov 08.