ARECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03035 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He received a ticket for Driving Under the Influence (DUI) and speeding while driving off base. He allowed the civilian court to handle his case with the belief it would not risk his military career. He plead guilty in civilian court on 19 Jul 96 and within one month of returning to work, he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) from the squadron commander. He was given a general discharge (under honorable conditions) and barred from the base. Had he known the consequences, he would have allowed the military to handle his case under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). It was unjust that he did not receive proper counsel. In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of the civilian Judgment of Conviction, AF Form 2731, Substance Abuse Reorientation and Treatment Program Disposition; AF Form 1058, Unfavorable Information File Action, a LOR, and base debarment letter. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 12 Aug 93, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force for a period of four years. On 23 Aug 96, his commander notified him he was recommending his separation from the Air Force under the provisions of AFI 36- 3208, Administrative Separation of Airman, for a pattern of misconduct involving minor disciplinary infractions. The specific reasons for this action were in Jun 94, he committed carnal knowledge with a female under the age of 16 years. For this offense he received Article 15 punishment on 16 Sep 94. This Article 15 was placed in his Unfavorable Information File (UIF). On 19 Apr 95, he received Article 15 punishment for violation of a lawful general regulation by wrongfully consuming alcohol while under the age of 21. This incident occurred on 1 Apr 95 and the Article 15 was placed in his UIF. On or about 10 Aug 96, he was arraigned in civilian court for the charges of DUI (1st offense) and for speeding. He plead guilty to both offenses. His sentence was a fine of $335.50, 30 days in jail (suspended), and 30 days revocation of his driver’s license. For these actions he received a LOR, which was placed in his UIF. On 26 Aug 96, the Staff Judge Advocate found the discharge legally sufficient. On 3 Sep 96, the applicant was separated from the Air Force with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. He served 3 years and 22 days of total active service. On 21 Sep 00, the Air Force Discharge Review Board concluded no change in discharge was warranted. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provided a copy of an Investigative Report. (Exhibit C). On 2 Feb 12, a copy of the FBI report and a request for post- service information were forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). On 1 Mar 12, the applicant provided copies of a nomination letter to “Who’s Who Among Students in American Junior Colleges”, eligibility, recognition, and membership letters from the Phi Theta Kappa International Honor Society, an invitation letter from Louisiana Tech University, a membership letter for the Golden Key International Honour Society, and a statement in support of his claim. In his statement he indicates the unfair discharge he received did not interfere with his goals and believes the skills he learned in the military taught him to overcome the obstacles in his life. He hopes the achievements he has received demonstrate to the Panel that his previous behavior is not indicative of what he is destined to be. 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 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 was contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation, unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses committed. While the applicant only references his civilian conviction for DUI as the basis for his discharge, it was but one of several issues which formed the basis for his administrative discharge for a pattern of misconduct, to include committing carnal knowledge with a female under the age of 16 years and wrongful consumption of alcohol while under the legal age of 21 years. We considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency and while we find his post- service activities commendable, 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 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 this application in Executive Session on 8 Mar 12, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC- 2011-03035: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Aug 11, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. FBI Report, dated 10 Nov 11. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 2 Feb 12. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, not dated w/atchs.