ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-1994-10160-3

XXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL: NONE

	HEARING REQUESTED: NO

APPLICANT’S REQUEST

The Board reconsider his request to upgrade his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable. 

He receive copies of his awards and discharge certificates issued in 1988. 

RESUME OF THE CASE

The applicant is a former Air Force airman first class (E-3), who received a general (under honorable conditions) discharge on 19 Feb 88 for misconduct – pattern conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline. 

On 15 Oct 90, the Discharge Review Board (DRB) considered and denied his request for an upgrade to his discharge, finding the discharge was consistent with procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority.

On 21 Oct 94, the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) considered and denied his request for an upgrade to his discharge, correction of his grade, and a change to his Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code, finding that his request was not timely submitted.  

On 3 Jan 14, the applicant petitioned the Board for reconsideration of his case.  Since no new relevant evidence was presented, it did not meet the criteria for reconsideration by the Board.  No further action was taken and the applicant’s case was closed.

For an accounting of the applicant’s original request and the rationale of the earlier decision, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit H.

On 7 Apr 20, the applicant again requested his discharge be upgraded.  He contends he was a victim of reprisal and racism stating he was a key witness in a drug case.  The applicant did not submit any evidence with his application.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit I.

POST-SERVICE INFORMATION

On 24 Jun 20, the Board sent the applicant a request for post-service information, including a standard criminal history report from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI); however, he has not replied (Exhibit K).

APPLICABLE AUTHORITY

On 25 Jul 18, the Under Secretary of Defense issued supplemental guidance to military corrections boards in determining whether relief is warranted based on equity, injustice, or clemency.  These standards authorize the board to grant relief in order to ensure fundamental fairness.  Clemency refers to relief specifically granted from a criminal sentence and is a part of the broad authority Boards have to ensure fundamental fairness.  This guidance applies to more than clemency from sentencing in a court-martial; it also applies to any other corrections, including changes in a discharge, which may be warranted on equity or relief from injustice grounds.  This guidance does not mandate relief, but rather provides standards and principles to guide Boards in application of their equitable relief authority.  Each case will be assessed on its own merits.  The relative weight of each principle and whether the principle supports relief in a particular case, are within the sound discretion of each Board.  In determining whether to grant relief on the basis of equity, an injustice, or clemency grounds, the Board should refer to the supplemental guidance, paragraphs 6 and 7. 

According to AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, incorporating changes through 8 Jun 17, paragraph 1.18, the types of service characterization are as follows: 

Honorable.  The quality of the airman’s service generally has met Air Force standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty or when a member's service is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be inappropriate. 

Under Honorable Conditions (General).  If an airman’s service has been honest and faithful, this characterization is warranted when significant negative aspects of the airman's conduct or performance of duty outweigh positive aspects of the airman's military record.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

After reviewing all Exhibits, the Board majority finds insufficient evidence on an error or injustice.  It appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the commander’s discretion.  The discharge was not unduly harsh or disproportionate to the offenses committed.  In the interest of justice, the Board considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, given the evidence presented, and in the absence of post-service information and a standard criminal history report from the FBI, the Board majority finds no basis to do so.  Additionally, the Board is satisfied that the application of liberal consideration does not warrant any relief.  Regarding the applicant’s requests for copies of his awards and discharge documentation issued in 1988, the Board is not the custodian of Air Force records.  As such, a Standard Form 180, Request Pertaining to Military Records, was sent the applicant on 24 Jun 20 to request copies of his records.  Therefore, the Board majority recommends against correcting the applicant’s record.

RECOMMENDATION

The Board recommends informing the applicant the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, and the Board will reconsider the application only upon receipt of relevant evidence not already presented.

CERTIFICATION

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-1994-10160-3 in Executive Session on 3 Feb 21:

, Chair, AFBCMR
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

A majority of the panel voted against correcting the record.  Ms. Plunkett voted to correct the record and provided a minority opinion (Exhibit L).  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit H:	Record of Proceedings, w/ Exhibits A-G, dated 21 Oct 94.
Exhibit I:	Application, DD Form 149, dated 7 Apr 20.
Exhibit J:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit K:	Letter to Applicant, Clarifying Guidance, dated 24 Jun 20.
Exhibit L: Minority opinion, dated 19 Feb 21.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings, as required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.