RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00873 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: After 42 years, he has shown to be a respectable individual and a very proud veteran. The upgrading of his discharge is justified through his good citizenship. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides his DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 23 September 1970. On 13 June 1972, he was notified of his commander’s intent to discharge him from the Air Force after he was diagnosed with a character and behavior disorder rendering him unsuitable for military service. The applicant was absent without leave from 24 February 1972 through 4 March 1972 and he failed to go to his appointed place of duty on 3 April 1972. The commander recommended his service be characterized as general. The applicant was evaluated by an evaluation officer who found that he was not a suitable candidate for rehabilitation and that he should be furnished a general discharge. On 18 July 1972, the staff judge advocate found the discharge legally sufficient and concurred with the applicant’s commander and the evaluation officer. On 20 July 1972, the commander approved the discharge and directed he be separated with a general discharge. The applicant was separated on 26 July 1972. On 2 December 1980, the Air Force Discharge Review Board Hearing Board considered and denied the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge. On 29 October 2013, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for response within 30 days (Exhibit C). 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 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, or unduly harsh. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the applicant’s discharge on the basis of clemency; however, we found the evidence submitted insufficient to compel us to recommend granting the request on that basis. 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-00873 in Executive Session on 3 December 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Feb 13, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 29 Oct 13. 1 2