RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-02499 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: It’s been 40 years since he was discharged. He believes a General Discharge turns into an Honorable. He is also thinking of joining an American Legion in his area. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 2 Oct 68, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force. On 31 Oct 69 the applicant was referred by a chaplain for evaluation at the Neuropsychiatric clinic at the Portsmouth Naval Hospital. The provisional diagnosis was passive-aggressive personality—possibly suicidal. The consultation remarks note the applicant upset about having to go to Vietnam and describes coming from an unstable home environment. On 3 Nov 69, the applicant was diagnosed with a passive-aggressive personality. The Chief of Psychiatric Services indicated the applicant was very impulsive and threatened suicide if not discharged. On 12 Jun 70, the Chief of Psychiatric Services completed a complimentary diagnostic evaluation for the applicant’s commander using the 31 Oct 69 evaluation, adding the applicant was under minimal stress, has a severe premorbid personality (predisposition from his personal history toward development of his current situation), and is severely impaired in functioning in his Air Force duties. The psychiatrist notes the applicant translates his stress into threats of suicide to try and manipulate his environment. From 21 Sep 70 to 14 Dec 70, the applicant was absent without leave (AWOL). He voluntary returned to duty on 15 Dec 71. On 18 Dec 70, the applicant was found guilty for AWOL by a Special Court Martial. The sentence adjudged was confinement to hard labor for 5 months, forfeiture of $30.00 per month for 5 months, and reduction to the grade of airman basic (E-1). The applicant entered confinement on 18 Dec 70 and was returned to duty 16 Mar 71, with the unexecuted portion suspended. On 21 Mar 71, the applicant was notified by his commander of discharge action under AFM 39-12 due to a Character and Personality Disorder and defective attitude. The applicant was advised of his rights and declined counsel. On 25 May 71, the discharge action was found legally sufficient. On 3 Jun 71, the applicant was furnished a General, Under Honorable Conditions discharge, and was credited with two years, two months, and seven days of active service. In response to a request for post-service information, the applicant responded describing his life after his discharge and his family environment while on active duty (Exhibit D). 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, to include his rebuttal response, 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 applicant presented evidence sufficient to recommend granting relief on that basis. 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 members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-02499 in Executive Session on 1 Mar 16 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Jun 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Jul 15. Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 7 Sep 15.