RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02057 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. 2. His narrative reason for separation be changed. 3. His separation program designator (SPD) code of JKQ (Misconduct) be changed. 4. His reenlistment (RE) code of 2B (Separated with a general or under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge) be changed to allow him to reenter military service. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was forced out of the military over an incident that was resolved by another authority. He unintentionally disposed of a package and withheld the information from his office until questioned by the Office of Special Investigation (OSI). He had no history of any disciplinary actions prior to this incident. He believes the disciplinary action was harsh since he was a young airman in training. His general discharge disqualifies him for federal employment. He wants his discharge upgraded to allow him to serve his country again. He would like to reenlist before he becomes ineligible due to age. In support of his appeal, applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, two personal statements, and character and employment references. Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 15 Nov 91, the applicant contracted his enlistment in the Regular Air Force. He was progressively promoted to the grade of airman, having assumed the grade effective and with a date of rank of 15 May 93. He served as an Information Management Apprentice. On 28 Sep 93, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for misconduct (commission of a serious offense). The specific reasons for the discharge action were on 1 May 93, he was convicted by court- martial for disposing of government property valued at $7,600.00; and destroying a public record. For this misconduct, his punishment consisted of hard labor without confinement and restriction to the base for 60 days. His commander advised him of his rights in this matter. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification and, after consulting with legal counsel waived his right to submit a statement in his own behalf. The staff judge advocate reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support separation and recommended a general discharge without probation and rehabilitation. The discharge authority directed discharge with a general discharge without probation and rehabilitation. He was discharged on 19 Nov 93. He served two years and five days on active service. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation indicated that on the basis of the data furnished, they were unable to locate an arrest record. The applicant in support of his application submitted a revised resume and personal statement (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 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 characterization of the service, narrative reason for separation and RE code was contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation, unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses committed. 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. _________________________________________________________________ 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-2010-02057 in Executive Session on 5 Oct and 7 Oct 10, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 24 May 10, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Military Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, Applicant, dated 19 Sep 10, w/atchs.