RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01587 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: At the time of his discharge the military was cutting back and he became a casualty. He was immature and careless with his actions, but does not believe his actions warranted the punishment he received. He is trying to procure life insurance through United Services Automobile Association (USAA) to protect his future wife, and they will not accept him due to his discharge. In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 9 Mar 92, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force and was progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class. He received one (1) Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) which was a referral report with an overall rating of “1.” On 1 Apr 94, the applicant was notified by his commander that he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for a pattern of misconduct - conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline. The reasons for the proposed action were: 1) On 11 Jan 93, he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for failure to report to his duty section at the prescribed time. (His fifth failure to go in six weeks) 2) On 3 Aug 93, he received an Article 15, for wrongful consumption of alcoholic beverages while under the age of 21 years. Punishment imposed was a reduction in grade to airman basic (with the reduction below the grade of airman suspended until 2 Feb 94). 3) On 24 Mar 94, he received an Article 15, for wrongful consumption of alcoholic beverages while under the age of 21 years. Punishment imposed was a suspended reduction to the grade of airman, and forfeiture of $100.00 per month for one month. 4) He received seven (7) Records of Individual Counseling, three for failure to go, three for failure to conform to AFR 35-10, Dress and Personal Appearance of Air Force Personnel standards, and one for failure to attend required training. On 1 Apr 94, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge and, after consulting with counsel, waived his right to submit statements in his own behalf. The base legal office reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support separation and recommended that he receive a general discharge without probation and rehabilitation. On 11 Apr 94, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen, by reason of misconduct, and received a general discharge. He served on active duty for a period of two years, one month, and three days. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provided a copy of an Investigative Report, which is at Exhibit C. On 21 Jun 11, a copy of the FBI report was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. At the same time, the AFBCMR staff offered the applicant an opportunity to provide information pertaining to his activities since leaving the service (Exhibit D). _________________________________________________________________ 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. After careful consideration of the available evidence, the discharge appears to be in compliance with the governing regulations in effect at the time and we find no evidence to indicate the applicant’s separation from the Air Force was inappropriate. We find no evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the documentation that has been submitted in support of the applicant’s appeal, we do not believe he has suffered from an injustice. 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 considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient 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 Docket Number BC-2011-01587 in Executive Session on 2 Aug 11, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 24 Apr 11, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. FBI Report of Investigation, dated 2 Jun 11. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 21 Jun 11.