RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-01506
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  14 NOV 08

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was very young while in the service.  He did not understand why he was being discharged with a UOTHC discharge.  He did not have counsel nor was he allowed to contact his parents during the contested time period.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant entered active duty on 10 August 1971 in the grade of airman basic.  He served as an Apprentice Recreational Specialist Helper.

On or about 5 March 1972, applicant failed to obey a general regulation by operating a motor vehicle without public liability and property damage insurance and was absent without leave (AWOL) from 16 to 18 March 1972.  For this misconduct he received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  He was ordered to forfeit $100.00 pay, 14 days extra duty, and was reduced in grade to airman basic.  The reduction to airman basic was suspended until 12 October 1972 unless sooner vacated.

Applicant having knowledge of a lawful order issued by a master sergeant to return to the orderly room by 1600 hours on or about 1 May 1972, failed to do so.  For this misconduct, his suspended reduction to airman basic was vacated.
Applicant having knowledge of a lawful order issued by a superior officer suspending him from using any of the facilities of the airmen open mess for an indefinite period, did on or about 5 June 1972, failed to obey said order.  On or about 6 June 1972, applicant failed to go at the time prescribed to his place of duty.  For this misconduct he received Article 15 punishment.  He was ordered to forfeit $124 pay for two months and ordered to perform 30 days extra duty.

On 5 March 1972, applicant was apprehended by Lowry AFB Security Police for driving his car at 40 mph in a 25 mph zone, operating a POV with a defective muffler causing excessive noise, operating POV with an unsafe tire (bald), and operating his POV with a defective headlight.  Further investigation revealed a tear gas pistol under the front seat of the automobile.

On 6 March 1972, applicant was taken to the USAF Dispensary for emotional disorders.  The medical report indicated alcohol was a factor.  He became so unruly and uncontrollable the security police had to be called.

On 23 April 1972, applicant was involved in a fight with another airman at the Airman’s Open Mess.

On 28 April 1972, applicant was scheduled to report for a personal appearance inspection by the commander.  He did not report as instructed.

On 30 April 1972, applicant complained to the security police that he had been drugged.  Investigation revealed that he had been mixing drinks and had been drinking excessively.

On 8 May 1972, applicant was involved in a fight at the Airman’s Open Mess.  For his misconduct and racial comments, he was suspended indefinitely from using the Airman’s Open Mess facilities.

On 12 September 1972, applicant was discharged with an UOTHC discharge.  He served 1 year, 1 month, and 2 days on active duty.

On 12 March 1973, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request that his UOTHC discharge be upgraded (Exhibit B).

Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provided a copy of an Investigative Report, which is at Exhibit C.

On 8 August 2007, the applicant was provided the opportunity to respond to the Investigative Report and to provide documentation pertaining to his post-service activities, within 30 days (Exhibit D), 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 injustice.  We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we find no evidence of an error or injustice that occurred in the discharge processing.  Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the commander’s discretionary authority.  The applicant has provided no evidence which would lead us to believe the characterization of the service was contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation, unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses committed.  We considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, no evidence has been presented which would persuade us granting the relief sought on that basis is appropriate.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which to recommend granting the relief sought.

4.	The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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 11 October 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2007-01506 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 April 2007.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  FBI Report of Investigation.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 8 August 2007.