RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-00074
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  08 JULY 2006

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be changed.  The Board could award him the Purple Heart, Bronze Star, Medal of Valor, etc.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The type of discharge he received was unjust.  He is currently receiving 100% disability compensation from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA).

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a personal statement and a partial copy of the DVA Decision Review Officer Decision, dated 4 June 2004.  Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 5 March 1982 for a period of four years.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of airman on 17 April 1982 and airman first class on 17 October 1982.  He received two Airman Performance Reports (APRs) closing 4 March 1984 and 4 March 1983, which overall evaluations were “8,” and “8.”

On 8 March 1984, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending he be discharged from the Air Force for minor disciplinary infractions.  The commander recommended applicant receive an under honorable conditions (general) discharge based on the following:  (1) On 11 January 1984, applicant received an Article 15 for drinking eight hours prior to duty, incapacitating himself for the proper performance of his duties.  Punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of airman and forfeiture of $100.00 for one month.  (2) On 1 January 1983, applicant was found passed out in front of the base dining facility due to alcohol consumption.  (3) On 25 December 1983, applicant reported for duty incapacitated for the proper performance of his duties.  (4) On 15 November 1982, applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for failing a dormitory room MEI inspection.

In his recommendation for separation, the commander indicated that prior to the initiation of this action, the applicant had been placed in the Alcohol Rehabilitation Program in February 1983 and had successfully completed the program in April 1983.  Based on a 25 December 1983 incident, he was again placed in the Alcohol Rehabilitation Program, where he was identified as a “K-2 Alcoholic (Alcohol Abuser).” 

Applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge and waived his rights to consult with legal counsel and submit statements in his own behalf.  The base legal office reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support separation.  The reviewer recommended applicant receive an under honorable conditions (general) discharge without probation and rehabilitation.  The discharge authority approved the separation and directed that applicant be discharged with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge without probation and rehabilitation.

Applicant was separated from the Air Force on 12 April 1984 under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen (misconduct - pattern of minor disciplinary infractions), with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge.  He had served two years, one month and two days on active duty.

The DVA rating decision provided by the applicant indicates that, on 4 June 2004, the applicant was granted service connection for post traumatic stress disorder with an evaluation of 100%, effective 19 February 2002.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS states based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  The discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant’s request.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

On 15 April 2005, SAF/MIBR informed the applicant that they contacted officials from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) to receive copies of his service medical records but they did not receive a response.  They informed him of the delay and recommended he contact a DVA representative if he needed assistance.  They also informed him that his application could not be fully evaluated without the required records.  However, no response has been received.

A copy of letter, with attachments, attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 29 April 2005, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant 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 error or injustice.  Evidence has not been presented that would lead us to believe the applicant’s administrative discharge was erroneous or unjust.  We have noted the applicant’s contentions concerning alleged sexual assault.  Since we were unable to review the applicant’s service medical records, our review of this case was confined to the administrative record.  A review of these documents finds no substantiation for the applicant’s allegations, although it appears he had a number of opportunities to raise the issues he discusses in his application when the various actions cited by his commander were being taken.  In cases of this nature, regularity is presumed in the conduct of Air Force officials absent a showing of error or injustice.  Other than his own assertions, we do not find the evidence provided by the applicant sufficient to substantiate his claims.  We have also reviewed the DVA decision document provided by the applicant and do not find it supports a change to his military records since this decision was dated more than 20 years after his discharge and it appears the decision was made based largely on statements made by the applicant after leaving the service.  In view of the above and absent evidence by the applicant showing the information in his discharge case file is erroneous, his substantial rights were violated, or his commanders abused their discretionary authority, the applicant’s request for a change to his discharge is not favorably considered.

4.  We have noted the applicant’s apparent request for various awards.  However, he has provided no evidence showing any act(s) on his part met the criteria for the requested awards or that recommendations for the awards were submitted and improperly disapproved.  Therefore, his request in this regard is denied.

_________________________________________________________________

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 this application in Executive Session on 30 June 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

			Panel Chair
			Member
			Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2005-00074 was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 1 Jan 05, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 28 Apr 05.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 15 Apr 05, w/atchs.
	Exhibit E.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Apr 05.

					
					Panel Chair