RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-01888
				INDEX CODE:  110.00
				COUNSEL:  None

				HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was wrongfully discharged due to unjust acts of other military members.  He was selected for a special one-year Temporary Duty (TDY) and his supervisor retaliated by downgrading his Airman Performance Report (APR).  When he reported an officer for possible abuse against a family member he was charged with being disorderly on station and was transferred to another flight and ordered to undergo a mental health evaluation and was discharged.

Since being discharged from the Air Force, he has served in the Marine Corps, California Air National Guard (CARNG) and selected to attend officer candidate school (OCS).  He also has owned his own restaurant and has been involved in several fundraisers within the community.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 17 December 1982, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force (RegAF) as an airman (Amn) for a period of four years.

The applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation on 16 April 1984 for an episode in the dormitory where the applicant entered a room wearing a camouflage hat and paint with an open knife with the intent of playing a joke on a Senior Airman (SrA) and as a result of the incident the SrA received a small cut.  The mental evaluation diagnosed the applicant as having immature personality traits characterized by impulsiveness, acting out, lack of 
insight, lack of respect for appropriate rules and demands in his social environment.  The psychologist stated the applicant “was not mature, stable or appropriate for Personnel Reliability Program (PRP) and I recommend that he be permanently decertified from PRP.  Given the applicant’s immaturity and history of problems in the squadron, I have concerns about whether he was appropriate for crosstraining.”

On 26 April 1984, the applicant was notified of his commander's intent to recommend him for discharge for minor disciplinary infractions.  The specific reasons for the discharge action were:

	a.  The applicant received notification of a returned check to the noncommissioned officer (NCO) club on 27 June 1983.

	b.  The applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) on 4 July 1983 for failure to report.

	c.  On 3 October 1983, the applicant received a Letter of Counseling (LOC) for failure to report.

	d.  On 21 November 1983, the applicant received a Dormitory Standards Letter for an unsatisfactory dormitory room on 18 November 1983.

	e.  On 11 January 1984, the applicant received a LOC for being late to a mandatory formation.

	f.  The applicant received an Article 15 dated 5 April 1984 for being disorderly on station on or about 2 April 1984.

The commander advised the applicant of his right to consult legal counsel and that military legal counsel had been obtained for him; and to submit statements in his own behalf; or waive the above rights after consulting with counsel.

On 8 May 1984, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification letter and that military counsel was made available to assist him; and after consulting with counsel, applicant invoked his right to submit a statement.

A legal review was conducted in which the staff judge advocate recommended the applicant be discharged with a general discharge with no probation and rehabilitation.

On 14 May 1984, the discharge authority approved the discharge.

Applicant was discharged on 15 May 1984, in the grade of airman first class with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge, in accordance with AFR 39-10 (Misconduct-pattern of minor disciplinary infractions).  He served 1 year, 4 months and 29 days of active service.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS states the applicant has not submitted any evidence nor identified any errors or injustices that occurred in the processing of his discharge.  Based upon the documentation in the applicant's file, they believe his discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulations of that time.  Also, the discharge was within the sound discretion of the discharge authority.  Also, he did not provide any facts to warrant an upgrade of his discharge.  Based on the information and evidence provided they recommend the applicant's request be denied (Exhibit D).  

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states the reasons that were stated for his discharge are not accurate.  He was discharged for reporting an officer for conduct unbecoming an officer.  He was discharged for doing the right thing not the politically correct thing.  He further states the misconduct committed was probably enough to discharge him but these actions were minor and no one is perfect.  He has achieved several accomplishments since being discharged from the Air Force.  He is requesting this upgrade to right an injustice that was committed several years ago.

A complete copy of the applicant’s response is attached at Exhibit F.

A copy of the investigative report was forwarded to the applicant on 2 August 2004, for review and response.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

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 of 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 agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force and adopt their rationale as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden that he has suffered either an error or an injustice.  Based on the documentation in the applicant's records, it appears the processing and the characterization of the discharge were appropriate and accomplished in accordance with Air Force policy.  We have considered the applicant’s overall quality of service, however, in view of his misconduct while he was on active duty and the apparent continued acts of misconduct after leaving active duty, we do not believe that clemency is warranted.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2004-01888 in Executive Session on 21 October 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Jun 04, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  FBI Report.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 25 Jun 04.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Jul 04.
   Exhibit F.  Applicant’s Response, dated 6 Jul 04, w/atchs.
   Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 2 Aug 04, w/atch.