RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 		DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-04051

				COUNSEL:  NONE

				HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded 
to Honorable.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

At the time of his discharge he was very young and immature.  He 
respectfully asks the Board consider upgrading his 
characterization of service based on several reasons.  First, 
upon leaving the military he managed to pay his own way through 
college and earn a Bachelor’s Degree in Business Administration 
from Columbia College.  Second, he raised a family of four and 
put two of his children through college.  Finally, during his 
children’s formative years he participated in all of their 
activities including, but not limited to sports, scouts, band, 
and theater.

Throughout his life he has instilled the importance of strong 
faith within his family and to this day is still a strong 
contributor to both his church and local community.  

In support of his request, the applicant provided a letter of 
recommendation from his brother, a retired Air Force Colonel.    

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 16 Nov 
78.

On 19 Jul 79, the applicant accepted an Article 15, Nonjudicial 
Punishment, for failing to go in violation of Article 86 of the 
Uniform Code of Military Justice.  He received 7 days base 
restriction and 14 days of extra duty.


On 4 Jan 80, the applicant accepted an Article 15, Nonjudicial 
Punishment, for dereliction of duties in violation of Article 92 
of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.  He was ordered to 
forfeit $50.00 per month for two months.  

On 13 Mar 81, the applicant accepted an Article 15, Nonjudicial 
Punishment, for failing to obey a lawful order in violation of 
Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.  He was 
reduced in grade to Airman (suspended) and ordered to forfeit 
$100.00 per month for two months.

On 2 Dec 81, the applicant accepted an Article 15, Nonjudicial 
Punishment, for failing to obey a lawful order in violation of 
Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.  He was 
reprimanded.  

On 29 Apr 82, the applicant was notified by his commander he was 
initiating discharge actions in accordance with AFM 39-12, 
Separation for Unsuitability, Misconduct, Resignation, or 
Request for Discharge for the Good of the Service and Procedures 
for the Rehabilitation Program, Chapter 2, Section B, paragraph 
2.15(a).     

On 6 May 82, the Staff Judge Advocate reviewed the case and 
found it legally sufficient.  The discharge authority approved 
the request and directed a General discharge without probation 
and rehabilitation.  The applicant was furnished a General 
(Under Honorable Conditions) discharge, and was credited with 5 
years, 5 months, and 21 days of active service.   

On 18 Aug 89, the Air Force Discharge Review Board denied the 
applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge.  They concluded it 
was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements 
of the discharge regulation, within the discretion of the 
discharge authority, and that the applicant was afforded full 
administrative due process.  

A request for post-service information was forwarded to the 
applicant on 17 Oct 14 for review and comment within 30 days.  
As of this date, no response has been received by this office.


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-2014-04051 in Executive Session on 18 Aug 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-04051 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 Oct 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Clemency Information Bulletin.