RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-02398
		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:

During the contested time period he was very young and he believes his punishment was too harsh.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 18 March 1975 in the grade of airman basic.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of senior airman, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 December 1977.  He served as a Medical Material Specialist.

On 17 November 1978, the 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.  The specific reason for this action was the applicant's substantiated defective attitude as manifested by repeated incidents of misconduct and failure to properly discharge the duties and responsibilities of an airman with his grade and experience.  He had not demonstrated responsibility by repeated involvement in documented incidents such as a government vehicle accident, check returned for insufficient funds, sleeping during duty hours, disobeying his superior noncommissioned officer, failure to go, and drug involvement.  

He was advised of his rights in this matter and acknowledged receipt of the notification on that same date.  After consulting with counsel the applicant submitted a conditional waiver requesting that he receive a general discharge.  In a legal review of the case file, the staff judge advocate found the case legally sufficient and recommended discharge.  On 6 December 1978, the discharge authority concurred with the recommendations and directed discharge with a general discharge.  The applicant was discharged on 7 December 1978.  He served 3 years, 8 months and 17 days on active duty.

Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Clarksburg, West Virginia, was unable to identify an arrest record on the basis of the information furnished - Exhibit C.

On 8 August 2008, the Board staff requested the applicant provide documentation pertaining to his post-service activities, within 30 days (Exhibit D).  The applicant's response with attachments is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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 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 an 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-2008-02398 in Executive Session on 5 November 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

			Panel Chair
			Member
			Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

  Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 June 2008, w/atchs.
  Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
  Exhibit C. FBI Negative Reply, dated 11 July 2008.
  Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 8 August 2008.
  Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, not dated, w/atchs.

				
				Panel Chair