RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-05150
		COUNSEL:  NONE
	XXXXXXX	HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His separation was a result of an emotional condition.  He has 
worked with the government for over 24 years and has a flawless 
record of service.  His contributions to his community, society, 
and government should be considered.  An honorable discharge 
will allow him to use his military service towards credit for 
his retirement.

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his 
DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of 
Transfer or Discharge and change of address notification.

His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 11 Apr 1969, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force.

On 2 Sep 1970, a psychiatrist diagnosed the applicant with 
“emotionally unstable personality, chronic, moderately severe, 
EPTS, LOD no.”  He recommended that he be administratively 
discharged.

On 30 Nov 1970, his commander notified him that he was 
recommending he be discharged under the provisions of AFM 39-12, 
Separation for Unsuitability, Unfitness, Misconduct, 
Resignation, or Request for Discharge for the Good of the 
Service and Procedures for the Rehabilitation Program.  The 
reason for his proposed action was “a character and behavior 
disorder diagnosed by medical authority as an emotionally 
unstable personality, chronic, moderately severe.”

On 30 Nov 1970, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the 
discharge notification.

On 4 Dec 1970, the Acting Staff Judge Advocate found the 
discharge legally sufficient.

On 28 Dec 1970, the applicant was discharged with a general 
(under honorable conditions) discharge after serving 1 year, 
8 months and 15 days of active duty.

On 2 Jul 2013, a request for post-service information was 
forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 
30 days.  (Exhibit C) 

On 16 Jul 2013, the applicant requested his case be 
administratively closed.  (Exhibit D)

On 21 Oct 2013, the applicant requested his case be reopened.  
He provided an extensive statement regarding his life prior to 
enlisting in the Air Force as well as his post-service 
accomplishments.  His commitment and dedication as a 
Communication Specialist led to early promotions and supervisory 
assignments and he wore his uniform with pride.  In his last few 
months in the service, he became emotionally unstable and 
detached from the Air Force.  After visiting with the base 
psychologist it was determined that his discharge from the Air 
Force was appropriate.  He is a model citizen and takes pride in 
his character and reputation.  After he was discharged, he 
became a woodworker and advanced to lead cabinetmaker in three 
years.  He enrolled in jazz classes at a local college; playing 
music at night and working during the day as a cabinetmaker.  In 
1974 he moved to a small town where he worked for the U.S. 
Forest Service on a fire suppression crew.  He later went to 
work rigging logs and within a few years he was promoted to Crew 
Foreman.  He moved back to Utah to help care for his ill father 
and worked at a music store selling instruments during the day 
and playing music at night.  He subsequently enrolled in a 
technical college and worked as a Carpenter’s Apprentice for 
four years.  He learned a great deal about the construction 
trade from his father who was an expert craftsman.  He received 
his Journeyman Carpenter’s Certificate and belonged to the local 
Carpenters’ Union for approximately ten years.  During his 
apprenticeship he reconnected with his high school sweetheart 
and they have been happily married for 33 years.  Together they 
have built two homes and raised two successful children.  He 
loves being a dad and has been an active parent in his 
children’s life.  For the last twenty-five years, he has worked 
for the city Building Services and Civil Enforcement Division.  
During his employment with the City he received certifications 
as a Building Inspector and Plans Examiner with the 
International Code Council.  He holds a state license as a 
Building Inspector and is certified with the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency.  He currently works as the Civil Enforcement 
Manager, managing nineteen inspectors and support staff, working 
daily with the Mayor's Office.  He has earned a Black Belt and 
served as a liaison for his sister city in Matsumoto, Japan.

His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit F.

________________________________________________________________

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.  In the interest of 
justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on 
clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is 
sufficient to compel us to recommend granting 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 in this application.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that 
the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 
that 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 this application 
in Executive Session on 13 Mar 2014, under the provisions of AFI 
36-2603:

       , Panel Chair
       , Member
       , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-
2012-05150:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Oct 2012, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 2 Jul 2013, w/atch.
    Exhibit D.  E-mail, Applicant, dated 16 Jul 2013.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Jul 2013.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 21 Oct 2013, w/atchs.





                                    
                                   Panel Chair


4


4