RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-04072 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _____________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable and the narrative reason of misconduct-pattern of minor disciplinary infractions be removed. _____________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was coerced into accepting the discharge as a means to remove himself from a difficult working relationship with his superior officer. Although he was aware of the discharge type at the time, he has only recently had a reason to review it and consider it objectively. He served with honor, completed his duties as assigned and was considered an outstanding airman by all whom he came in contact with, albeit for one individual. The circumstances surrounding his inevitable discharge were coordinated by commanders and sergeants who empathized with his situation and wished to help relieve him of it in the most expeditious manner possible. He did not consider what accepting anything less than an honorable discharge would do to his future reputation or self-honor. He was pressured to leave the Air Force as soon as possible due to a family need and; therefore, accepted the discharge. He found himself to be the target of criticism and antagonism from his new commanding officer. When his performance did not come up to the commander’s standards, he was issued an Article 15, Record of Non-judicial Punishment, as being insubordinate. Superior members of his squadron agreed he was being unfairly targeted by the commander. At the same time his mother-in-law was experiencing medical issues and he had requested a hardship discharge, which was being approved until the commander blocked it. Because of this, and against the commander’s wishes, the hospital commander and another senior noncommissioned officer counseled him on being discharged if he desired, knowing the situation with the commander was unlikely to improve and wanting to help him get home to take care of his ailing mother-in-law. Once he agreed and assured them he had no intention of serving in the military again, they put together the papers and ordered the commander to agree to the discharge. He was told the narrative reason was required for his discharge to be approved. He was removed from under the commander and worked in the library until his release. He continued to live off base and was free to come and go as he pleased, even though the procedure for a true “disciplinary” discharge was quite the contrary, as most perform hard labor and are closely monitored until release. On his last day he was allowed to leave the base freely, at his leisure and not escorted off as is sometimes customary. A year or two after his discharge, he received a call from his former commander, apologizing for the way things transpired. Since leaving the Air Force he has returned to school to finish his education and has recently applied to complete his master’s degree. He can receive a significant discount with his military experience and it is with some embarrassment that he submits a copy of his discharge with the way it is written. He enjoyed a very successful career in the information technology field and currently works as the Director of Development for a laboratory company. He harbors no ill will towards the Air Force in any way and wants to set the record straight. He served honorably and deserves to have that reflected on his discharge. In support of his request, the applicant provided statements and a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _____________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant entered the Regular Air Force on 16 Nov 84. He served for a period of 1 year, 4 months, and 15 days. Records indicate the applicant was provided numerous verbal counselings, written counselings for being late to work and failure to complete assigned duties in a timely manner, a Letter of Reprimand for failure to obey a lawful order, and an Article 15 for dereliction of duty with a reduction in grade to airman basic, and 14 days extra duty. On 14 Mar 86, he was notified of pending discharge action. He consulted counsel and waived his right to submit matters in his own behalf. The discharge was found to be legally sufficient and the discharge authority directed discharge. He was discharge on 1 Apr 86. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigations was unable to identify an arrest record with the information furnished (Exhibit C). _____________________________________________________________ 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 have considered applicant's overall quality of service, the events which precipitated the discharge, and available evidence related to post-service activities and accomplishments. Based on the evidence of record, we cannot conclude that clemency is warranted. The applicant has not provided sufficient information of post-service activities and accomplishments for us to conclude that he has overcome the behavioral traits which caused the discharge. Should the applicant provide statements from community leaders and acquaintances attesting to the applicant's good character and reputation and other evidence of successful post-service rehabilitation, this Board will reconsider this case based on the new evidence. 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 Docket Number BC-2008-04072 in Executive Session on 5 February 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 6 Nov 08, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Negative FBI Report.