RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01535 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded. ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He believes the punishment was too severe based on his situation. He was under the influence of alcohol when he entered the female latrine, but did not come in contact with anyone. He served his country honorably and having an under honorable conditions character of service is looked upon harshly when applying for jobs. In addition, he is still being punished for a senseless act that was committed many years ago. The applicant provides no supporting documentation. The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 5 Jan 82 and was progressively promoted to the grade of sergeant (Sgt/E-4). The squadron commander initiated administrative discharge action against the applicant for misconduct, specifically, a pattern of misconduct. The underlying basis for this action was a series of disciplinary infractions committed by the applicant, specifically, for the acts of misconduct: a. He received an Article 15 for operating a passenger vehicle while drunk. For this misconduct, he was fined $100.00. b. He received a letter of counseling (LOC) for signing forms stating that work had been done, when in fact, it had not been done. c. He exhibited disorderly conduct, for this misconduct he received an Article 15. His punishment consisted of a suspended reduction in grade to A1C and a fine of $424.00. d. He received an Article 15 for signing an official record, with intent to deceive, stating that he drove a private automobile from the base to New York City and from New York City to Oakland CA. His punishment consisted of a reduction in grade to A1C, effective 24 Sep 86. After consulting with counsel and having been advised of his rights, the applicant exercised his right to an administrative discharge board (ADB). The ADB determined the applicant should be separated with a general discharge, with Probation and Rehabilitation (P&R). The wing staff judge advocate recommended a general discharge, without P&R. The discharge authority approved the general discharge without P&R. The applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10, on 8 Dec 86, by reason of misconduct – pattern discreditable involvement with military or civil authorities, with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). He was credited with 6 years, 11 months, and 4 days of active duty service. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. In his response to the FBI report, the applicant indicates that they have the wrong person and provided an employment resume noting his accomplishments since leaving military service. In support of his response, the applicant provides a personal statement; a copy of his DD Form 214, and an employment resume. The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ 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 during the discharge process. 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 characterization of the service was contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation, unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses committed. We also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency. We have considered the available evidence of record; however, considering his overall record of service, the FBI Report of Investigation, and the lack of post service information since his discharge, we are not persuaded that an upgrade of the characterization of his discharge is warranted. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which to recommend granting the relief sought. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2010-01535 in Executive Session on 3 March 2011, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 13 Apr 10. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. FBI Report of Investigation. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 31 Jan 11, w/atchs. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 24 Feb 11, w/atchs. Panel Chair