RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-01108 INDEX CODE:	110.02
COUNSEL:	NONE HEARING DESIRED:	NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He did not want to leave the service and was content in his job.
He had an injury and his left lung collapsed. He experienced problems after being released from the hospital and was not allowed to seek additional medical care.

He still has problems with his lungs.
His discharge was unfair and unjust and he did not have a choice in his discharge.

He works with a veteran’s organization helping veterans with their benefits.

The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant entered the Regular Air Force on 6 Aug 69 and served for a period of 1 year, 5 months, and 26 days.

On 31 Aug 70, the applicant received an Article 15, Record of Nonjudicial Punishment, for uttering a worthless check. He was ordered to forfeit $32 for one month and a suspended reduction in grade to airman, suspended until 28 Feb 71.

On 25 Nov 70, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for failure to go at the time prescribed to his proper place of duty.

On 27 Nov 70, the applicant received a LOR for insufficient funds.

On 9 Dec 70, a medical evaluation resulted in the applicant being diagnosed with a character and behavior disorder best diagnosed as: adult situational reaction; immature personality; possible psychophysiological disorder, manifested by unhappiness with his job, feeling of being betrayed because he was put back to work where he had previously been hurt. He had ineffectual responses to emotional and physical demands; lack of physical and emotional stamina. He had pain in his left chest for which no organic cause could be found on repeated examinations. His predisposition: marked; precipitating stress: spontaneous pneumothorax while on the job; impairment: moderate. The evaluator stated the applicant’s condition was not amenable to treatment within the Air Force, and may be expected to interfere with adequate military adjustment.

On 11 Jan 71, the applicant was notified of pending discharge action. He consulted counsel and waived his right to submit statements in his own behalf. Records indicate that prior to discharge action, the applicant was counseled on numerous occasions for his negative attitude.

On 15 Jan 71, an evaluation officer’s report revealed the applicant was counseled regarding probation and rehabilitation and that the applicant had no desire to be rehabilitated in the Air Force.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) was unable to identify an arrest record based on the information provided (Exhibit C).

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. 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
1.	
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 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- 2008-01108 in Executive Session on 19 June 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

Chair 
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 13 Mar 08.
Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.	Negative FBI Report.