RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-04525

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His character of service be changed from General, (Under 
Honorable Conditions), to Honorable.  

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

1.  Until August 1974 his job as a security forces specialist 
was going very well.  He moved off-base and shared a trailer 
with two other airmen.  Unknown to him at that time, one of his 
roommates belonged to a group who were involved in some local 
armed robberies.  

2.  He was questioned about the robberies by the Air Force 
Office of Special Investigations (OSI), was totally cleared, and 
went about his duties as usual.  Shortly thereafter, he received 
threats on his life.  Because he had little to no support from 
his leadership, he left the base on 14 August 1974 and was 
absent without leave until he returned under protective custody 
in December 1974.  He was offered the option to cross-train and 
transfer to Denver or receive discharge in lieu of a court 
martial.  He was discharged with the stipulation that he never 
return to the base or the local area.  

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

1.  According to documents extracted from his military personnel 
record, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 
17 October 1973.  

2.  On 16 December 1974, charges were preferred against the 
applicant for being absent without leave (AWOL) from 
15 August 1974 through 13 September 1974, and a deserter from 
14 September 1974 through 5 December 1974.  On 30 December 1974, 
the applicant, after consulting with legal counsel, submitted a 
letter of request for discharge 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, September 1, 1966, paragraph 2-
78 for the good of the service.  In the letter, the applicant 
confirmed that he understood that this type of discharge, if 
approved, may result in his receiving an undesirable discharge 
under conditions other than honorable, regardless of the 
recommendation of the commander.  In which event, he would not 
be entitled to settlement of accrued leave, may be deprived of 
veteran’s benefits, and may encounter substantial prejudice in 
civilian life in situations where the type of service rendered 
in any branch of the Armed Forces or the type of discharge 
received therefrom may have a bearing.  

3.  On 6 January 1975, the applicant’s commander recommended the 
request for discharge be approved and the applicant be furnished 
a general discharge.  Subsequent to the file being found legally 
sufficient, the discharge authority approved the request for 
discharge and directed the applicant be discharged with a 
General Discharge Certificate, DD Form 257AF, without probation 
or rehabilitation.  The applicant was released from active duty 
on 31 January 1975, and credited with 11 months and 23 days of 
active duty service.  

4.  On 5 March 1980, the applicant submitted an appeal for 
upgrade of his discharge to the Air Force Discharge Review Board 
(AFDRB).  The applicant was offered and accepted a personal 
appearance, with counsel, before the AFDRB scheduled for 
19 March 1981, but failed to appear without requesting a 
postponement.  The Board reviewed the case and found that the 
discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive 
requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the 
sound discretion of the discharge authority and the applicant 
was provided full administrative due process.  The Board could 
find no basis for an upgrade.  The applicant’s military service 
was totally unproductive and the only matter of record which 
warranted remark was the extensive AWOL.  The applicant’s 
service was, in the opinion of the Board, undesirable.  The 
Board concluded that the applicant’s discharge should not be 
changed.  On 4 June 1981, the applicant was advised that since 
his case was denied by the AFDRB he had the right to appeal to 
the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR).  

5.  On 2 April 2013, the applicant was given an opportunity to 
submit comments regarding his post service activities 
(Exhibit C).  

6.  In an undated letter of response (Exhibit D), the applicant 
states that since he left the Air Force he has been gainfully 
employed.  He spent time working as an undercover transportation 
observer, traveling on public and private buses, subway trains, 
and even trolley cars, observing the operators for misconduct.  
He is currently employed as an assistant teacher for special 
needs children.  He has been a member of the Veterans of Foreign 
Wars (VFW) and the American Legion.  The applicant reiterated 
that because of the attempts on his life and the lack of support 
from his leadership he left the base.  

The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

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 during the discharge process.  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, or unduly harsh.  In the 
interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based 
on clemency; however, there was no evidence submitted 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 issue(s) 
involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably 
considered.

________________________________________________________________

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 6 June 2013, under the provisions of AFI 
36-2603:

			, Panel Chair
			, Member
			, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2012-04525 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149 dated 24 September 2012 w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 2 April 2013.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, not dated.





                                   
                                   Panel Chair



AFBCMR
1500 West Perimeter Road, Suite 3700
Joint Base Andrews NAF Washington, MD 20762






Dear:

	Reference your application submitted under the provisions of AFI 36-2603 (Section 
1552, 10 USC), AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-04525.

	After careful consideration of your application and military records, the Board 
determined that the evidence you presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or 
injustice.  Accordingly, the Board denied your application.

	You have the right to submit newly discovered relevant evidence for consideration by the 
Board.  In the absence of such additional evidence, a further review of your application is not 
possible.

	BY DIRECTION OF THE PANEL CHAIR




				                                   
				                                   Chief Examiner
				                                   Air Force Board for Correction
				                                   of Military Records

Attachment:
Record of Board Proceedings






 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
WASHINGTON, DC


Office of the Assistant Secretary