RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-02961 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His General discharge be upgraded to an Honorable discharge. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He has been informed he needs an honorable discharge to obtain a Veteran license plate for his truck. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 17 Oct 73. On 26 Jun 78 a special court-martial was convened, and the applicant was arraigned and tried for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 134, wrongful transfer of marijuana, on or about 5 May 78. On 27 Jun 78, the applicant was found guilty, and sentenced to be confined at hard labor for two months, and to forfeit $50.00 per month for three months. On 23 Aug 78, the applicant’s Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) appointment was vacated, and he was designated as a senior airman, effective immediately. On 1 Sep 78, the applicant was notified by his commander that he was initiating actions against him with a view to effecting his discharge, recommending an “Under Other Than Honorable Conditions” (UOTHC) discharge. Subsequently, that day the applicant acknowledged his commander’s intent, and waived his right to a hearing before a board of officers provided he be issued a General discharge. On 19 Sep 78, the applicant’s Support Group Commander, recommended to the Numbered Air Force commander, that discharge actions be approved and the applicant furnished a General discharge, without probation and rehabilitation. On 5 Oct 78, the Judge Advocate (JA) reviewed the applicant’s case, and determined it was adequately documented, in compliance with appropriate directives and was legally sufficient to support the recommended discharge action. On 16 Oct 78, the applicant was furnished a General discharge, and was credited with five years of active service. On 6 Dec 15, SAF/MRBR sent the applicant the Upgrade of Discharge – Clemency Information Bulletin. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D) The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR-SEP recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR-SEP evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 9 Dec 15 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). 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 agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. The applicant has presented no evidence whatsoever that would indicate that there was an abuse of discretionary authority or that the applicant was deprived of rights to which he was entitled. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, the applicant did not provide any post-service information for us to evaluate whether or not his post-service contributions warrant an upgrade of his discharge. 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-2015-02961 in Executive Session on 21 Apr 16 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-02961 was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 Jul 15, w/atch. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR-SEP, dated 13 Nov 15. Exhibit D.  Clemency Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Dec 15,   w/atch. Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Dec 15.