RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01417
		
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He had seen his dad get his head blown off at the early age of 14.  He never got over this tragic moment in his life once he entered the Air Force.  He hopes the Board finds it possible to change his discharge to general.  He was told by the Air Force that he could get his discharge changed after 6 years and it has now been 30 years.  

Applicant’s complete submission,  is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 11 October 1968 and was progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class.

On 20 April 1970, he was tried by a special court-martial for two incidents of absent without leave (AWOL).  The first time, he was AWOL from 9 December 1969 to 4 January 1970 and again, from     12 January to 12 March 1970.  He was confinement at hard labor for 3 months, forfeited $50 per month for 3 months and reduced from airman first class to airman basic and discharged from the service.  The Clemency Board reviewed the case and considered all matters including comments and recommendations on 30 April 1970.  The Board approved the sentence and forwarded the record of trial to the Judge Advocate General of the U. S. Air Force for review.  The discharge was confirmed and executed in accordance with Special Court Martial Order #36, 12 Jun 70, and he was discharged 22 Jun 70.  He served 1 year, 3 months, and 15 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial and states that the applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  He provided no other facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge.  Upon review of the applicant’s DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, we noted that “Character of Service” Block 13a, shows the applicant received an “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions” (UOTHC) discharge; however, based on the final Special Court-Martial Order #36 (dated 12 June 1979) an the original sentence, it should read, “Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD).”  A discharge of UOTHC is less severe than a BCD.  We defer to the Board to determine if this should be changed in accordance with documentation contained in his records.  

AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 30 May 2003 for review and comment within 30 days.  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 an error or injustice. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that any corrective action is warranted.  We therefore agree with the recommendations of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of having suffered either an error or an injustice.  The only other basis upon which to upgrade his discharge would be based on clemency.  However, the 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.
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of a 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-2003-01417 in Executive Session on 29 July 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

				Panel Chair
				Member
				Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 16 Apr 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 19 May 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 May 03.

                                   
                                   Panel Chair