RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-00613
            INDEX CODE:  110.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be  upgraded  to
a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was not given a chance to complete his years of military service.  He  is
disabled and needs a pension.

In support of his request, the applicant provided a copy of VA  Form  21-22,
Appointment of Veterans Service Organization  as  Claimant’s  Representative
and DD Form 293, Application for the Review  of  Discharge  from  the  Armed
Forces of the United States.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on  23  September  1964  in  the
grade of airman basic.  He  was  progressively  promoted  to  the  grade  of
airman second class having assumed that grade effective and with a  date  of
rank of 1 June 1966.  On 25 January 1968, the applicant was notified by  his
commander of his intent to recommend discharge from the Air Force under  the
provisions of AFM 39-12, chapter 2,  section  B,  paragraph  2-15,  frequent
involvement of a discreditable nature with civil  or  military  authorities.
The specific reasons for this action were as follows:

     a. Applicant was tried by a General  Court-Martial  on  7 January  1967
for committing an assault.  The applicant did on or  about  14 August  1966,
at the Club Blue Light, Koza City, Okinawa, strike and kick a fellow  airman
on the head, face, body, and legs with  a  table,  bottles,  fist  and  shod
foot, and did thereby intentionally inflict grievous bodily  harm  upon  him
(a laceration on  the  forehead  extending  to  the  skull,  other  multiple
lacerations, a black eye, and injury to the jaw).  On  that  same  date,  he
also struck another airman in the face with his fist.  He was  found  guilty
of both offenses.  He was sentenced to be  discharged  with  a  bad  conduct
discharge (BCD), a forfeiture of all pay and allowances, to be  confined  at
hard labor for one year and reduced to the grade of  airman  basic.   On  12
July 1967 that portion of the sentence pertaining to the BCD  was  suspended
until 12 January 1968  and  the  unexecuted  portions  of  the  sentence  to
confinement and forfeiture were remitted.

     b. The applicant received numerous reprimands  and  was  counseled  for
failure to go.

     c. On 9 January 1968, the applicant without proper authority,  absented
himself from his organization, and remained absent  until  on  or  about  12
January 1968.  For this offense he received an Article 15.   His  punishment
consisted of 30 days correctional custody with extra duties.  The  execution
of his correctional custody was suspended for sixty days.

He was advised of his rights in this matter and acknowledged receipt of  the
notification  on  that  same  date.   After  consulting  with  counsel   the
applicant waived his right to a hearing before an  administrative  discharge
and elected not to submit statements on his own behalf.  In a  legal  review
of  the  case  file,  the  staff  judge  advocate  found  the  case  legally
sufficient and recommended discharge.   The  discharge  authority  concurred
with the  recommendations  and  directed  discharge  without  probation  and
rehabilitation.  The applicant was discharged with an UOTHC discharge  on  1
March 1968.  He served 2 years, 10 months and 29 days on active duty.

On  11  March  2008,  the  Board  staff  requested  the  applicant   provide
documentation pertaining to his  post-service  activities,  within  30  days
(Exhibit C).  As of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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  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.   We  considered  upgrading  the  discharge  based  on  clemency;
however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient  to  compel  us
to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis.   Therefore,  in  the
absence of evidence to  the  contrary,  we  find  no  basis  upon  which  to
recommend granting the relief sought.

4.    The applicant's case is adequately documented  and  it  has  not  been
shown that a personal appearance with or  without  counsel  will  materially
add to our understanding of the issues  involved.   Therefore,  the  request
for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or an 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-2008-
00613 in Executive Session on 6 August 2008, under the provisions  of  AFI
36-2603:

                 Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
                 Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member
                 Mr. Kurt R. LaFrance, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

  Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 31 January 2008, w/atchs.
  Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
  Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 11 March 2008.





                       THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                       Chair