RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00270 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His discharge was unjust and based on false information. He is seeking employment with a security company and needs it upgraded. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 8 Oct 1980, the applicant entered active duty. On 17 May 1982, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was initiating action to discharge him from the Air Force. The specific reason for this action was the applicant’s personality disorder which interfered with his ability to adequately perform his duties. The letter also noted several disciplinary actions committed by the applicant. For a full list of the offenses, please see the commander’s notification letter at Exhibit B. On 17 May 1982, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the letter of notification. He also acknowledged that approval of the recommendation for discharge could result in him being given a discharge certificate less favorable than an honorable one, and that legal counsel was available to assist him. On 27 May 1982, the applicant was interviewed by an evaluations officer and was advised of his rights to submit a rebuttal and to make statements in his own behalf. On 8 Jun 1982, the staff judge advocate found the case file legally sufficient and recommended the applicant receive a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. On 11 Jun 1982, the discharge authority directed the applicant be discharged and issued a general (under honorable conditions) discharge without probation and rehabilitation. On 16 Jun 1982, he was discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions) for Unsuitability – Personality Disorder. He served one year, eight months and nine days of active duty. On 20 Sep 2013, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for response within 30 days (Exhibit B). 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 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 during 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 was 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 applicant’s discharge based on clemency; however, after considering his overall record of service, the numerous infractions which led to his administrative separation and the lack of post-service documentation, we are not persuaded that an upgrade on this basis is warranted. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which to recommend granting the relief sought. ________________________________________________________________ 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 Docket Number BC-2013-00270 in Executive Session on 7 Nov 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Jan 2013, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 20 Sep 13, w/atch. 1 2