RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03898 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded to an Honorable discharge. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Having a General discharge does not allow him access to some veteran opportunities. His commanding officer led him to believe that his General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge would automatically be upgraded to an Honorable discharge after six months. Not until recently, when his application for membership in a credit union for veterans was turned-down, did he learn there was no automatic upgrade of his General discharge. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 26 Apr 84. On 15 Jan 85, it was determined the applicant was clinically obese and entered into the Air Force Weight Management Program (WMP). On 18 Apr 86, the applicant’s commander issued him a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for unsatisfactory and inconsistent performance in the WMP. On 12 Jun 86, the applicant’s commander issued him a LOR for unsatisfactory progress in the WMP, placed him on the control roster for a period of four months, and created an Unfavorable Information File (UIF) on him. On 21 Jul 86, the applicant’s commander denied his award of the Air Force Good Conduct Medal (AFGCM) for the period 26 Apr 84 thru 11 Oct 86. On 13 Aug 86, the applicant’s commander issued him a LOR for dereliction of duty for failing to report to his appointed place of duty a violation of Article 92, UCMJ. On 11 Sep 86, the applicant’s commander notified him he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for minor disciplinary infractions and unsatisfactory performance. The reasons for this action were: a. During the period 25 Aug 86 to 29 Aug 86, the applicant failed to attend his daily aerobics exercise classes as directed by the base commander. b. On 22 Aug 86, the applicant failed to report for duty on time, and was not in compliance with AFR 35-10, Dress and Appearance, for which he received a letter of counseling (LOC). c. On 18 Aug 86 and 26 Aug 86, the applicant failed to make his weekly and monthly weigh-ins, and did not inform the weight control monitor as to the reasons for these no shows. d. On 12 Aug 86, the applicant failed to report to his appointed place of duty, for which he received a LOR. e. On 27 May 86, the applicant failed to make his monthly weigh in, a mandatory appointment under the WMP, for which he received a LOC. On 11 Sep 86, the applicant’s commander recommended him for discharge. The applicant subsequently acknowledged receipt of the action, waived his right to an administrative discharge board hearing, and submitted statements in his own behalf. The case was found to be legally sufficient. On 22 Sep 86, the discharge authority directed the applicant be discharged and furnished a General discharge. On 7 Oct 86, the applicant was furnished a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge, with a Narrative Reason for Separation of Exceeding Air Force Weight Standards, and was credited with 2 years, 5 months, and 12 days of active service. On 3 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 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.  In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, in the absence of any evidence related to the applicant’s post-service activities, there is no way for us to determine if the applicant’s accomplishments since leaving the service are sufficiently meritorious to overcome the misconduct for which he was discharged.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought. ________________________________________________________________ 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-2013-03898 in Executive Session on 10 Jul 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-03898 was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Aug 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 3 Jun 14. 1