RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02395 (DECEASED) COUNSEL: NONE (BROTHER) HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The deceased former member’s discharge be upgraded from Undesirable to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANTS CONTEND THAT: He did not know the deceased former member had an undesirable discharge until after he had passed away. He was a wonderful individual. In support of the request, the applicant provides copies of excerpts from the deceased former member’s military personnel records; birth, marriage, and death certificates; Social Security and Medicare cards; certificate of church membership; and documents related to his retirement from Firestone. The applicants’ complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The deceased former member’s military personnel records were apparently located in the area most heavily damaged in the fire at the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) in 1973. According to documents provided by the applicant, the deceased former member served on active duty from 20 Aug 51 through 29 Jun 54, when he was furnished an Undesirable discharge and credited with three years, six months, and ten days of total active service. On 6 Jan 55, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) notified the former member of their determination that the evidence he submitted as part of his application to upgrade his discharge was insufficient to warrant a change in the type and nature of his discharge. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provided a copy of an Investigative Report indicating they were unable to locate an arrest record on the basis of the information provided. A request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant on 4 Oct 10 (Exhibit C). In response, the deceased former member’s daughter requested the deceased former member’s brother be allowed to pursue the instant request as the deceased former member’s spouse had passed away (Exhibit D). The applicant requested the case be administratively closed until such time that he was prepared to proceed (Exhibit E). On 12 Mar 12, the applicant requested that his deceased brother’s case be reopened (Exhibit G). In support of his response, he provides an expanded statement and copies of five supporting statements. ________________________________________________________________ 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 note the deceased former member’s military personnel records are not available for our review as they were apparently located in the area most heavily damaged in the fire at the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) in 1973. Therefore, the facts surrounding his separation and character of service could not be verified. However, based on the presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs, absent evidence to the contrary, we must assume that his discharge, to include his service characterization and narrative reason for separation, were proper and in compliance with the directive under which it was effected. The applicant has provided no evidence which would lead us to believe the characterization of the deceased former member’s 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 on the basis of clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient for us to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis at this time. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend favorable consideration of the application. ________________________________________________________________ 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-2010-02395 in Executive Session on 7 Aug 12, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Jun 10, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Available Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 4 Oct 10, w/atch. Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 29 Aug 10. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 10 Nov 10. Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 19 Nov 10. Exhibit G. Letter, Applicant, dated 12 Mar 12, w/atchs.