RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-04473

  					COUNSEL:  NONE

					HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded 
to honorable.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His Chief Master Sergeant and First Lieutenant asked his opinion 
about something they said was “off the record” when in fact that 
was not the case.  He was punished and given false information 
about the possibility of having the general discharge upgraded 
to honorable within two years.  

The Board should find it in the interest of justice to review is 
untimely application because he went on with life not knowing 
how it would affect his ability to get benefits and insurance.  

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 13 Feb 63, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force.

On 10 Feb 64 and 14 Dec 64, he received Letters of Reprimand for 
failure to report to his prescribed place of duty and for being 
apprehended by the Police on a charge of drunkenness.  

On 14 May 64, he was court-martialed for failing to go at the 
time prescribed.  He was restricted to base for a period of 30 
days, ordered to forfeit $40.00 and be reduced to the grade of 
airman basic.

On 28 Jan 65, his commander notified the applicant he was 
recommending he be discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-16, 
Discharge for Unsuitability, paragraphs 4a & 4c, for acts of 
misconduct.  He acknowledged receipt declining to submit a 
statement on his own behalf.  

On 8 Feb 65, the applicant received a general (under honorable 
conditions) discharge and was credited with 1 year, 11 months 
and 26 days of active service.   

On 5 Nov 14, a request for post-service information was 
forwarded to the applicant for review and comment 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 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, in the absence of any evidence related to the 
applicant’s post-service activities, there is no way for us to 
determine if the applicant’s accomplishments since leaving the 
service are sufficiently meritorious to overcome the misconduct 
for which he was discharged Therefore, in the absence of 
evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting 
the relief sought.


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 documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-04473 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 28 Oct 14.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Nov 14.