RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01023

					COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be 
upgraded to under honorable conditions (general), to allow him to 
receive medical care from the Department of Veterans Affairs 
(DVA).


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His military legal counsel, despite a lack of evidence or 
witnesses, coerced him to take a plea deal because it was in his 
best interest.  At 24 years old, he did not know any better and 
did not contest the advice because he was advised the discharge 
would automatically be upgraded after six months.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 13 May 81, the applicant initially entered the Regular Air 
Force.

On 2 Apr 86, the applicant was furnished a UOTHC discharge—request 
in lieu of a trial by court martial and was credited with 4 years, 
10 months, and 20 days of active service. 

On 28 Jul 14, a request for post-service information was forwarded 
to the applicant for review and response 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 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.  In the interest of 
justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; 
however, we do not find the evidence presented warrant such 
consideration.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the 
contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought 
in this application.

4.  The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not 
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will 
materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.


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-2014-01023 in Executive Session on 22 Nov 14 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      , Panel Chair
      , Member
      , Member


The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR docket 
number BC-2014-01023 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 8 Mar 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Jul 14.