RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-02021
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

		COUNSEL:  AMERICAN LEGION

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was very proud of his service in the Air Force and was very upset over his discharge.  It is clear by reviewing his Airman Performance Reports (APRs) that he took pride in his work.  He believes that the circumstances surrounding his discharge were his fault.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 23 September 1983 in the grade of airman basic for a period of 4 years.

On 20 June 1986, the applicant was notified of his commander's intent to initiate discharge action against him for misconduct - discreditable involvement with military authorities (specific reasons at Exhibit B).

The commander indicated in his recommendation for discharge action that the applicant had been continually unable to conform to basic standards of his job and the regulations of the Air Force.  He had been counseled by his supervisors, first sergeant, and the commander on his performance and conduct and necessity to meet the standards expected of him with little or no effect.  The last effort towards rehabilitation as a result of Article 15 action was to put him in correctional custody.  His ratings (commander’s weekly evaluations) in comparison with others in correctional custody were weak.  The applicant completed 25 days in correctional custody.  The commander did not recommend probation and rehabilitation.  Numerous and varied efforts to rehabilitate the applicant failed completely, and there was no indication further rehabilitative efforts would have been successful.

The commander advised applicant of his right to consult legal counsel and submit statements in his own behalf; or waive the above rights after consulting with counsel.

On 23 June 1986, after consulting with counsel, applicant waived his right to submit statements in his own behalf.

On 24 June 1986, the Staff Judge Advocate recommended the applicant be administratively separated from the Air Force and furnished a general (under honorable conditions) discharge, without probation and rehabilitation.

On 30 June 1986, the administrative discharge was approved.

A resume of the applicant's performance reports follows:

		PERIOD ENDING		OVERALL EVALUATION

			17 Jul 84			9
			13 May 85			9
			13 May 86			8

Applicant was discharged on 2 July 1986, in the grade of airman first class, with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions), in accordance with AFR 39-10 (Misconduct - Pattern Discreditable Involvement with Military or Civil Authorities).  He completed 2 years, 9 months and 10 days of total active duty service.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, indicated they were unable to identify with arrest record on basis of information furnished (Exhibit C).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied.  They indicate that the commander notified the member on 20 June 1986 that he was being discharged for a pattern of misconduct-discreditable involvement with military authorities.  On 11, 21, 22, 24, and 25 April 1986, he wrote bad checks to the Base Exchange and received a letter of reprimand (LOR) on 5 June 1986.  On 7 February 1986, the member failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty.  He received an Article 15, a suspended reduction to airman, suspended $100 fine and 30 days correctional custody, of which he received remission after 25 days.  On 25 June 1985, 9 September 1985 and 3 January 1986, he failed to repair and received an LOR for each offense.  On 29 August 1984, 25 September 1984 and 3 April 1985, he failed to repair and received a letter of counseling for each offense.

Based on the documentation in the file, they believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  Additionally, the discharge was within the sound discretion of the discharge authority. 

The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  He provided no other facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge.  He has not filed a timely request.

The evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Counsel’s response to the evaluation is attached at Exhibit F.

On 5 October 2001, the Board staff requested the applicant provide post-service documentation within thirty (30) days.  Applicant’s response, with attachments, is at Exhibit H.

_________________________________________________________________

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.	Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable injustice regarding the applicant’s request to have his discharge upgraded to honorable. No evidence has been presented which would lead us to believe his discharge was improper or contrary to the directive under which it was effected.  Nevertheless, the Board majority finds that in view of the applicant’s successful transition to civilian life, as evidenced by the post-service documentation he has provided, we are of the opinion that upgrading his discharge to honorable, based on clemency, would be appropriate.  Accordingly, the Board majority recommends that the applicant’s general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 2 July 1986, he was honorably discharged and issued an Honorable Discharge Certificate.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 28 November 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

		Panel Chair
		Member
		Member

By a majority vote, the Board voted to correct the records, as recommended.  Mr. voted to deny the application and does not desire to submit a minority report.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 21 August 2001, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  FBI Report.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 12 September 2001.
   Exhibit E.  Letters, SAF/MIBR, dated 21 September 2001.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, Counsel, dated 11 October 2001, w/atchs.
   Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 5 October 2001, w/atch.
   Exhibit H.  Letter, Applicant, dated 1 November 2001, w/atchs.

			

AFBCMR 01-02021

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

	Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

	The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to    , be corrected to show that on 2 July 1986, he was honorably discharged and issued an Honorable Discharge Certificate.