RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00765 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded to Honorable. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He is long overdue for this action. At the time of discharge, he was going through some difficult family issues that resulted in a divorce. Since his discharge he has moved on with his life in a positive way and continues to be an upstanding citizen. He has held employment for six years with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) as a federal employee. He has felt a great amount of discontent and shame for his behaviors which led to his General discharge. He would like to bring this issue to resolve and clear both his record and conscious. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 11 Apr 79. On 14 Sep 81, the applicant’s duty status was changed from “Present for Duty” to “Absent Without Leave (AWOL)”. On 21 Sep 81, the applicant’s duty status was changed from “AWOL” to “Present for Duty”. It should be noted that he voluntarily returned to duty. On 30 Sep 81, the applicant received an Article 15, Nonjudicial Punishment, for violating article 86, without authority; go from your appointed place of duty. He was reduced in grade of Airman. On 13 Oct 81, the applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to initiate discharge based on a severe downward progression in duty performance under the provisions of AFM 39- 12, Separation for Unsuitability, Misconduct, Resignation, or Request for Discharge for the Good of the Service and Procedures for the Rehabilitation Program, Chapter 2, Section A, paragraph 2-4c. On 16 Oct 81, the applicant provided an expanded statement to the discharge authority for consideration. He contended that he fulfilled his military duties to the best of his abilities. He also accepted responsibility for the mistakes made over the past 31 months and should be considered for an Honorable discharge. On 12 Nov 81, the case was found to be legally sufficient and the discharge authority approved the commander’s recommendation the same day, directing the applicant’s administrative discharge without probation and rehabilitation. On 13 Nov 81, the applicant was furnished a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge, and was credited with 2 years, 7 months, and 3 days of active service. A request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant on 28 Apr 14 for review and comment within 30 days. 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 members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-00765 in Executive Session on 21 Nov 14 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Feb 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Information Bulletin – Clemency.