RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03316

					COUNSEL:  NONE

					HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgrade to a General discharge.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Due to the passage of time, he cannot remember what he was discharged for, but he believes he was a good Airman.  He would like the benefits that come with a General discharge because he needs back surgery. 

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 12 Jul 71.

On 31 Jul 72, the applicant’s commander notified him he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force.  The reasons for taking this action were:  on 20 Apr 72, the applicant received non-judicial punishment under Article 15 for disobeying a verbal order; on 24 May 72, the applicant received a an Article 15 for failure to go; on 13 Jun 72, the applicant received an Article 15 for being AWOL; and, on 27 Jun 72, the applicant received another Article 15 for being AWOL.  The applicant waived any right to a hearing before an administrative discharge board, and was notified of his right to legal counsel and to submit statements on his own behalf.  The discharge action was reviewed and determined to be legally sufficient. 

On 15 Aug 72, the discharge authority directed the applicant be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.  

On 18 Aug 72, the applicant was furnished a UOTHC discharge, after serving for one year, one month, and seven days. 

On 24 Aug 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-2014-03316 in Executive Session on 14 May 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-03316 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Aug 14, w/atch.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Aug 14.