RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-05107

						COUNSEL:  

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge.  

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He recently tried to utilize veteran benefits and became aware of the impact his discharge has on him.  If he had known, he would have addressed upgrading his discharge at an earlier time.  He wishes to be buried next to his brother in the veteran’s cemetery and have a veteran’s headstone.  This cannot be accomplished with his characterization of service.  

He was a voluntary member with four years of honorable service and the recipient of several awards and medals.  

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 19 September 1972.  

On 10 November 1976, the applicant plead guilty and was found guilty at a general court-martial (GCM) of one charge and one specification of stealing property of a total value of less than $50.00, in violation of Article 121, of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); one charge and four specification of falsely making and uttering bad checks, in violation of Article 123, UCMJ; one additional charge and one specification of stealing two decanters of bourbon for a total value or about $20.85; and one additional charge and fourteen specifications of making and uttering bad checks, in violation of Article 123, UCMJ.  He was sentenced to a bad conduct discharge (BCD), reduction in grade to airman basic (E-1), with confinement at hard labor for one year, and forfeitures of $50.00 per month for one year, suspended until 15 January 1978, unless sooner vacated.  
On 2 December 1976, an Air Form (AF) 2098, Duty Status Change, was issued, indicating the applicant was sentenced to confinement.  

On 15 December 1976, an AF 2098, was issued, indicating the applicant was released from confinement pending appeal.  He had a total of 14 days of lost time.  

On 18 July 1977, an AF Form 100, Request and Authorization for Separation, was issued relieving the applicant from his assignment and issued an UOTHC discharge, effective 11 April 1977.   

On 18 July 1977, the applicant was furnished a UOTHC discharge.  He was credited with four years, six months, and nine days of active service.  

On 9 March 2016, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment 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 are not persuaded that corrective action is warranted.  We note the applicant’s GCM sentence to a BCD was upgraded to an UOTHC discharge and find no basis to recommend any further upgrade of the applicant’s discharge characterization.  We further note there is no evidence which indicates the applicant’s service characterization which had its original basis in his court-martial conviction was improper or that it exceeded the limitations set forth in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  We have considered the applicant’s overall quality of service, the court-martial conviction which precipitated the discharge, and the seriousness of the offenses to which convicted.  However, in the absence of any evidence related to the applicant’s post-service activities that would enable us to determine if his accomplishments since his discharge are sufficient to overcome the misconduct for which he was discharged, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider this application.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend relief.  

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-2015-05107 in Executive Session on 4 May 2017 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 December 2015, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 9 March 2016, w/atch.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.