RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-02371
								INDEX CODE:  106.00
								COUNSEL:  NONE

								HEARING DESIRED:  YES

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  24 January 2009

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Separation Code (SPD) be changed to “KBK” (Completion of Required Active Service) and his Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code be changed to “1J” (Eligible to reenlist, but elects separation).

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

At the time of his misconduct, he was youthful and indignant.  He has lived with this failure for years, and feels that this has haunted him long enough.

He is interested in working for government contractors and, if hired, may be required to obtain security clearances. 

In support of his appeal, he has provided copies of numerous custodial documents relating to his son, his FAA Pilots License, numerous documents pertaining to his certification as a Pharmacy Technician, numerous documents pertaining to his participation in the Student Government Association at Texas Southern University (TSU), his TSU Bachelor of Science Degree in Airway Science certificate, a document of congratulations for his achievement in college studies from the Missouri City Church of Christ, two letters of recommendations, miscellaneous documents pertaining to his aviation activities, and a photograph.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Air Force Reserve for a period of six years on 14 February 1985, and began his active duty for training (Basic Military Training and Technical Training) on 26 March 1985. 

While attending Technical Training for Aircrew Egress Systems Mechanic at Chanute AFB, IL, the applicant was arraigned and tried by a Special Court-Martial on 15 July 1985.  He pleaded not guilty to the specification of larceny of property of a value of $279.00 on 5 July 1985, but guilty to the charge and lesser included offense of wrongful appropriation.  He was found guilty of the specification of larceny of property of a value of $279.00 on 5 July 1985, and was sentenced to a reduction in grade to the grade of airman basic (E-1), forfeiture of $279.00 per month for two months, and confinement for one month.

Applicant was discharged on 3 September 1985 in the grade of airman basic (E-1) with an Entry Level separation and uncharacterized service characterization.  He was given an SPD Code of “JKQ” (Misconduct-Other Serious Offenses) and an RE Code of “2C” (Entry level separation without characterization of service).  He completed a total of 5 months and 8 days of net active service.  

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Clarksburg, WV, provided a copy of an Investigation Report which is at Exhibit C.  On 6 September 2007, a copy of the FBI report was forwarded to the applicant, for review and comment within 30 days.  However, as of this date, no response has been received by this office.

On 6 September 2007, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for response within 30 days.  However, as of this date, no response has been received by this office.

At the time of the applicant’s discharge, the service characterization received was appropriate under the provisions of the governing regulation in effect at the time.  Attached at Exhibit E, is an excerpt from AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, which shows the current criteria for determining the characterization of service under similar circumstances.  Additionally, notwithstanding the absence of error or injustice, the Board has the prerogative to grant relief on the basis of clemency if so inclined.

________________________________________________________________

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 discharge was contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation, unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses committed, and an Entry Level Separation, uncharacterized character of service, and RE Code of “2C” are correct and in accordance with DoD and Air Force instructions.  Given that the applicant’s misconduct resulted in a finding of guilty by a Special Court-Martial, his SPD of “JKQ” is also appropriate.  We considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient 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 Docket Number BC-2007-02371 in Executive Session on 25 October 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, 12 Jul 07, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  USDOJ FBI Report, dated 14 Aug 07.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 6 Sep 07, w/atchs.
    Exhibit E.  AFI 36-3208 Extracts, dated 9 Jul 04.