RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03372 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 separation, he was informed that as a condition of his cooperation his discharge status would be upgraded to honorable following six months of separation without any additional action on his part. He recently discovered the upgrade did not happen. The applicant did not provide any supporting documents. The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who entered active duty on 7 December 1976. He served as an Aerospace Ground Equipment Technician and was progressively promoted to the grade of Sergeant, E-4 with a date of rank of 01 October 1979. On 26 May 1981, the applicant was notified by his commander that he was recommending him for discharge from the Air Force under the provisions of AFM 39-12, Chapter 2; section A, paragraph 2c. The specific reason for the proposed action was; apathy and defective attitude for his grade and failure to maintain prescribed standards of military deportment as evidenced by past Airman Performance Reports (APR) and current supervisory comment as well as wrongful possession and transfer of marijuana on 5 December 1980. On 26 May 1981, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge and his right to present his case before an administrative discharge board, be represented by counsel, and submit statements on his own behalf. On 26 May 1981 the applicant opted to consult with counsel but waived his right to submit a statement on his own behalf and have a hearing before an administrative discharge board. Subsequent to the file being found legally sufficient, the discharge authority approved the recommendation and directed the applicant be discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service. The applicant was released from active duty on 26 June 1981 and was credited with 4 years, 6 months and 20 days of active duty service. Pursuant to the Board's request, the FBI was unable to identify an arrest record on the basis of information furnished. On 27 March 2012, the applicant was given an opportunity to submit comments regarding his post service activities (Exhibit C). As of this date, this office has not received a response. ________________________________________________________________ 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 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. Furthermore, we do not find clemency is appropriate in this case since the applicant has not provided any evidence concerning his post- service activities. Based on the foregoing, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that 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-2011-03372 in Executive Session on 30 May 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-03372 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 August 2011. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 27 March 2012