RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01968

					COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His General (under honorable conditions) discharge be changed to 
Honorable.



APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

At the time of his discharge he was experiencing hardship and 
was forced to move to a relative’s home in Oklahoma.  He tried 
to set up a temporary transfer to the Oklahoma unit so that he 
could continue with his Unit Training Assembly (UTA).  After 
returning to his home unit and having missed several UTAs, he 
was informed of his discharge.  He was told that it would be 
under Honorable conditions for unsatisfactory participation.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Air National Guard on 5 Oct 
91.

On an illegible date, the applicant’s commander notified him of 
his intent to recommend his discharge for unsatisfactory 
participation in scheduled training.

On an illegible date in Jun 98, the applicant acknowledged 
receipt of the action and was afforded the opportunity to 
consult with legal counsel.

On 30 Dec 98, the applicant was furnished a general discharge, 
and was credited with 7 years, 2 months, and 26 days of active 
service.

On 4 Aug 14, a request for post-service information was 
forwarded to the applicant for review and response 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 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-2014-01968 in Executive Session on 29 Jan 15, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	



The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-01968 was considered:


	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 8 May 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Aug 14.