RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-04210

						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He thought an upgrade would happen automatically after six months of discharge.  He has a severe asthma condition and is unable to receive certain Veteran Affairs benefits due to his characterization of service.  

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant’s military personnel records indicate he enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 21 October 1964.  

On 28 July 1965, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending a General discharge for unfitness from the Air Force due to his frequent involvement of a discreditable nature with military authorities.  Since the applicant was recommended for discharge for unfitness, he qualified for a hearing before an administrative discharge board.  The reasons for the action included the following:  

		a)  Failure to go in violation of Article 86, of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), on 27 March 1965, 4 April 1965, 5 April 1965, 6 April 1965, and 17 April 1965.  

	b)  On 28 June 1965, the applicant received non-judicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15 of the UCMJ, for failure to go, on 10 June 1965, 11 June 1965, 16 June 1965, and 22 June 1965, in violation of Article 86, UCMJ.  His commander imposed punishment consisting of extra duties, not to exceed two hours per day, for a period of 45 consecutive days.  

	c)  On 19 July 1965, the applicant pled guilty and was found guilty at a Summary Court-Martial (SCM) for one charge and specification of improper wear of the uniform, in violation of Article 134, of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), and one charge and specification of failure to obey a lawful order, in violation of Article 92, UCMJ.  In addition, he pled not guilty and was found not guilty of one charge and specification of using reproachful words, in violation of Article 117, UCMJ.  He was sentenced to be restricted to the limits of the United States Naval Air Station, Olathe, Kansas for 30 days and reduction in grade to Airman Basic (E-1).  

	d)  On 27 July 1965, the applicant pled guilty and was found guilty at a SCM for one charge and specification of failure to go, in violation of Article 86, (UCMJ).  He was sentenced to be restricted to the limits of the United States Naval Air Station, Olathe, Kansas for 30 days.

On 28 July 1965, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the action, waived his right to a board hearing, and elected to submit matters in his own behalf.  

On 12 August 1965, the applicant’s commander recommended he be furnished a General Discharge and the terms “Undesirable,” “Unfitness” or “Unsuitability” will not be entered the DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge.  

On 19 August 1965, the applicant’s group commander recommended approval for him to be furnished a DD Form 257AF, General Discharge Certificate, and he was considered not eligible for the Probation and Rehabilitation (P&R) Program.  

On 30 August 1965, the separation authority directed the applicant be furnished a general (under honorable conditions) discharge without P&R.  

On 31 August 1965, the applicant was furnished a general (under honorable conditions) discharge, and was credited with 10 months and 11 days of active service.

On 25 March 2016, a request for post-service information was forwarded to applicant for 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 this case; however, we find no evidence of an error or injustice that occurred in the discharge process.  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 lead us to believe the characterization of his service was improper or contrary to the provisions of the governing directive.  In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharged based on clemency; however, in the absence of any evidence related to the applicant’s activities since leaving the service, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis.  In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists to upgrade the applicant’s general (under honorable conditions) discharge.  

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-2015-04210 in Executive Session on 1 November 2016 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-04210 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 28 August 2015, w/atch.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 25 March 2016, 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.