RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-02554
		INDEX CODE:  110.00
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was discharged because he did not come to work a few times.  His complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 26 July 1974, applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force in the grade of airman basic.  He served as an Aerospace Ground Equipment Repairman.

On 13 August 1975, applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to recommend his discharge from the Air Force under the provisions of AFM 39-12, chapter 2, section A, paragraph 2-4c (apathy, defective attitudes, and inability to expend effort constructively).  The specific reasons for this action were the applicant’s apathetic attitude and his inability to expend a constructive effort.  He constantly failed to go to his appointed place of duty.  He received a Record of Counseling, dated 14 March 1975 for failure to go; a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) dated 6 June 1975, for failure to go; and two Article 15s, dated 10 July 1975 and 30 July 1975, for failure to go.

He was advised of his rights in this matter and acknowledged receipt of the notification on that same date.  After consulting with counsel applicant elected not to submit statements on his own behalf.  An evaluation officer conducted a personal interview and recommended that he be discharged with a general discharge without probation and rehabilitation.  In a legal review of the case file, the staff judge advocate found the case legally sufficient and recommended that he be discharged.  On 19 September 1975, the discharge authority concurred with the recommendations and directed his discharge with a general discharge.  Applicant was discharged on 24 September 1975.  He served 1 year, 1 month and 28 days on active duty.
Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an Investigative Report which is at Exhibit C.

On 18 October 2007, the Board staff requested the applicant provide post-service documentation within 30 days (Exhibit D).  As of this date, this office has received no response.

On 7 November 2007, the applicant was provided the opportunity to respond to the Investigative Report, within 30 days (Exhibit E).  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.  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, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to compel us to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which to recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2007-02554 in Executive Session on 22 January 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 August 2007.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  FBI Report of Investigation.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 18 October 2007.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 7 November 2007.