RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-02603

 					COUNSEL:  NONE

					HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His court-martial was unfair.  He could not call the one witness 
who was on the scene at the time of the incident. 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 
13 September 1956.

On 7 January 1959, the applicant was notified of his commander’s 
intent to discharge him from the Air Force for repeatedly 
committing offenses.  The applicant waived his right to a 
discharge board and noted that he understood his separation 
could be listed as under conditions other than honorable or 
undesirable after consulting counsel.  

On 22 January 1959, the separation authority approved the 
separation and ordered the applicant be furnished with an 
undesirable discharge.  He was discharged on 20 February 1959.  
His service was characterized as under other than honorable.

On 24 July 2015, a request for post-service information and a 
request for a background check from the Federal Bureau of 
Investigations were 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, there was no 
evidence submitted 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 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-2015-02603 in Executive Session on 11 February 2016 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 18 Jun 15.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Jul 15.