RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2017-03987

	COUNSEL:  NONE
	
	HEARING:  NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The applicant makes no contentions. The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a former airman first class.  On 25 Jan 73, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend that he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFM 39-12, Administrative Separation of Airmen, for “unsuitability.”  The reasons for the action included failure to go to his appointed place of duty on two separate occasions and for sleeping on duty while posted as a sentinel, all in violation of various articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for which he received two non-judicial punishment actions under Article 15 of the UCMJ and one Letter of Reprimand.  On this same date, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification.

On 27 Jan 73, he waived his right to a hearing before an administrative discharge board and did not submit statements on his behalf.

On 30 Jan 73, the Staff Judge Advocate found the case legally sufficient.

On 31 Jan 73, the discharge authority approved the commander’s recommendation and directed the applicant be issued a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.

On 4 Feb 73, the applicant was discharged with 1 year, 8 months and 11 days of active service.  For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B.

On 18 Nov 17, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment (Exhibit C).  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was not timely filed.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available avenues of non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.  After thoroughly reviewing all Exhibits, it is the Board’s opinion that the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice.  It appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the commander’s discretion.  Nor was the discharge unduly harsh or disproportionate to the offenses committed.  In the interest of justice, the Board considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, given the evidence presented, the Board finds no basis to do so.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The applicant be informed the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, and the application will only be reconsidered upon receipt of relevant evidence not already considered by the Board.

CERTIFICATION:

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2017-03987 in Executive Session on 26 Jul 18:

All members voted not to correct the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atch, dated 1 Sep 17.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Post Service Clemency Letter, w/atch, dated 18 Nov 17.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.