RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-02942

						COUNSEL:  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXx

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His original discharge stated under honorable conditions.  

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 3 January 1972, the applicant commenced his enlistment in the Regular Air Force.

On 10 July 1972, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force under the provisions of AFM 39-12, Chapter 2, Section A, paragraph 2-4b, dated 1 September 1966.  The specific reason for the discharge action was on 15 June 1972, the applicant was evaluated by a competent medical authority and was found to possess a character/personality disorder (immature personality).

The Commander’s Report noted the following derogatory information: the applicant received disciplinary punishment for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 18 April 1972 to 1 June 1972.  For this misconduct his punishment consisted of reduction in rank to airman basic, forfeiture of $160.00 pay per month for two months, and 30 days correctional custody.  The portion of the punishment pertaining to the reduction to airman basic will be suspended until 15 December 1972, at which time unless this suspension is sooner vacated, it will be remitted without further action.

The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification for discharge.  On 12 July 1972, an evaluation officer was appointed who interviewed the applicant, reviewed his records and case file, and recommended the applicant be furnished a general discharge without probation and rehabilitation.

On 25 July 1972, the legal office reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support separation and recommended the applicant be furnished a general discharge without probation and rehabilitation.

On 27 July 1972, the discharge authority directed the applicant be furnished a general discharge and the applicant was so discharged on 28 July 1972, and was credited with 5 months, and 11 days of active service.

On 30 September 2016, a request for post-service information and a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) background check was forwarded to the applicant (Exhibit C).  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.  While the applicant claims a date of discovery of less than three years ago, in our view, the reasonable date of discovery of the alleged error or injustice was more than three years ago and the application is therefore untimely.  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, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to compel us to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis.  However, should the applicant provide documentation pertaining to his post-service accomplishments and activities, we would be willing to review the materials for possible reconsideration of his request based on clemency.  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-2015-02942 in Executive Session on 17 November 2016, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-02942 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 July 15, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Sep 16, w/atch.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.