RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00162

	 	COUNSEL:  NONE

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The reasons the applicant believes the records to be in error or unjust and the evidence submitted in support of the appeal are at Exhibit A.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 17 August 1970 for a period of four years.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of sergeant (E-4).

On 18 August 1972, the commander notified him of his intent to impose nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for violating Article 86 (Absent Without Leave (AWOL)).  Specifically, for being AWOL during the period 8 August 1972 to 12 August 1972 (four days), in that, without authority, he absented himself from his organization.  He waived his right to trial by court-martial and did not submit matters in his behalf.  On 23 August 1972, the commander imposed punishment consisting of reduction to the grade of airman first class (E-3), forfeiture of $100.00 per month for two months, and restriction to the limits of Takhli Royal Air Base for 14 days.  He did not appeal the punishment.  The reduction in grade portion of the punishment was suspended until 1 January 1973, at which time, unless sooner vacated, it would be remitted without further action.

On 29 August 1972, the commander notified him that he was proposing to vacate the suspension because he attempted to break restriction on 24 August 1972, in violation of Article 80, UCMJ.  He requested a personal hearing and submitted oral matters to the commander.  On 29 August 1972, the commander vacated the suspended portion of the punishment as provided for reduction to the grade of airman first class.

On 12 December 1972, he underwent a Mental Health Evaluation that diagnosed him with a passive dependent personality disorder.

On 1 May 1973, the commander notified him of his intent to impose nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 of the UCMJ for violating Article 86 (AWOL).  Specifically, for being AWOL during the period 30 March 1973 to 16 April 1973 (17 days).  He waived his right to trial by court-martial and did not submit matters in his behalf.  On 1 May 1973, the commander imposed punishment consisting of reduction to the grade of airman basic (E-1), and forfeiture of $100.00 per month for two months.  He did not appeal the punishment.

The commander notified him on 10 May 1973, that he was recommending his general discharge for his defective attitude and inability to expend effort constructively, as evidenced by repeated disciplinary actions.

He was discharged on 25 May 1973, with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions).  He completed 2 years, 8 months, and 22 days of active service, which excludes 21 days of lost time (AWOL 8 August 1972 - 12 August 1972 & 30 March 1973 - 15 April 1973).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  In addition, the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge and provided no facts warranting an upgrade of his discharge.

The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 21 February 2003 for review and response within 30 days.  However, as of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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 thoroughly reviewing the available evidence of record and noting the applicant’s complete submission, we find no evidence of error or injustice.  In this respect, the discharge appears to be in compliance with the governing regulation in effect at the time of his separation.  The applicant has provided no evidence to indicate that his separation was inappropriate.  Absent persuasive evidence applicant was denied rights to which entitled, appropriate regulations were not followed, or appropriate standards were not applied, we find no basis to disturb the existing record.

4.  We also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency.  We have considered the applicant’s overall quality of service, the events that precipitated the discharge, and available evidence related to his post-service activities and accomplishments.  On balance, we do not believe that clemency is warranted.

_________________________________________________________________

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-2003-00162 in Executive Session on 8 May 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 11 Jan 03.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 18 Feb 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Feb 03.