RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02522 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded to an Honorable discharge. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He always believed in his innocence, and in 2008 the state of Texas deferred and removed all charges against him. Since leaving the service, he has had an outstanding career as an air traffic controller and a Facility Manager. He has completed a Bachelor’s degree, is working on a Master’s degree, and will continue to be a model citizen and role model. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant entered the Regular Air Force on 30 May 89. During the period 21 to 24 Apr 93 an administrative discharge board (ADB) was convened in accordance with an involuntary discharge action initiated against the applicant for the following offenses: a.  On 21 Feb 93, the applicant carried on or about him a concealed weapon. b.  On 21 Feb 93, he wrongfully and willfully discharged the weapon. c.  On 21 Feb 93, he assaulted an individual by shooting him with his weapon. d.  On 21 Feb 93, he assaulted another individual by shooting him with his weapon. e.  On 21 Feb 93, he attempted murder of another individual by shooting him with his weapon. The ADB recommended the applicant be furnished an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge and the wing commander concurred with the ADB’s recommendation. On 1 Jul 93, 8 AF/JA found the case to be legally sufficient and recommended that the discharge authority (8 AF/CC) approve the board’s findings and direct the applicant be separated from the Air Force with an UOTHC discharge. On 6 Jul 93, the discharge authority approved the findings and recommendations of the discharge board. On 8 Jul 93, the applicant was furnished a general (under honorable conditions) discharge and was credited with four years, one month, and nine days of active service. On 10 Jun 14 a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (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 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 warranting corrective action. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge authority appropriately determined the applicant should be furnished an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge based on the recommendation of a properly constituted administrative discharge board. We note the applicant’s DD Form 214 indicates that he was furnished a general (under honorable conditions) discharge, which is inconsistent with the determination of the discharge authority. Nevertheless, we are not convinced by the evidence before us that the applicant’s discharge should be upgraded to honorable as he requests. While this Board has the authority to upgrade a discharge in the interest of justice on the basis of clemency when it finds an applicant’s contributions to society since leaving the service outweigh the misconduct which formed the basis of his or her discharge, we find no such showing here. Additionally, when considering whether or not to upgrade such a discharge, we thoroughly consider whether or not doing so represents a larger injustice to those that earned the characterization of service the applicant seeks. Given the seriousness of the applicant’s offenses, the scant evidence provided pertaining to the impact of his post-service contributions to society, and the fact that he has benefited from a more generous characterization of service than the UOTHC discharge directed by the discharge authority, we cannot find that it would be in the interest of justice to recommend granting the applicant’s request. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material 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-2013-02522 in Executive Session on 31 Jul 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 May 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 10 Jun 14, w/atch.