RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00937 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was told that her discharge would automatically be changed to honorable after a year, when her original service date would have been completed. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: According to the applicant's military personnel records, she initially entered the Regular Air Force on 23 Oct 79. On 16 Dec 83, the applicant requested she be administratively discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial. On 23 Dec 83, the applicant’s commander recommended that her request be approved. The reasons for the action included two specifications of theft involving requesting and receiving Basic Allowance for Quarters (BAQ) and Variable Housing Allowance (VHA) for periods of time when she lived in government quarters. On 17 Jan 84, the action was found legally sufficient and the discharge authority concurred with the commander's recommendation and directed the applicant be furnished a UOTHC discharge without probation and rehabilitation. On 25 Jan 84, the applicant was furnished a UOTHC discharge and was credited with four years, two months, and three days of total active service. On 25 Jul 14, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and response 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 warrant such consideration. 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-2014-00937 in Executive Session on 21 Nov 14 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 22 Feb 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 25 Jul 14.