RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04259 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His (general) under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 23 months of service. He served with distinction and honors, receiving numerous letters of recognition and achievement. In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of documents extracted from his military personnel records. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 26 Sep 85, the applicant contracted his enlistment in the Regular Air Force. He served as an Aircraft Pneudrautic Systems Mechanic. On 30 Jul 87, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending his discharge for misconduct. The specific reason for the discharge action was that he received an Article 15 for making obscene telephone calls between February 1987 and 29 June 1987. On 31 Jul 87, he acknowledged receipt of the notification letter and, after consulting with legal counsel, elected to submit a statement in his own behalf. On 7 Aug 87, the applicant waived his right to submit a statement in his own behalf. On 23 Aug 87, the legal office found the case to be legally sufficient and recommended the applicant be furnished a general (under honorable conditions) discharge without probation and rehabilitation. On 14 Aug 87, the discharge authority directed the applicant be furnished a general discharge without probation and rehabilitation. On 17 Aug 87, the applicant was furnished a general (under honorable conditions) discharge and he was credited with 1 year, 10 months, and 22 days of 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. On 15 Feb 12, the Board staff requested the applicant provide documentation concerning his activities since leaving military service (Exhibit C). In response, the applicant provides copies of character references and copies of various certificates, awards, and letters related to his professional accomplishments since leaving the service. The applicant’s complete response with attachments is at 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. 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. 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 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-2011-04259 in Executive Session on 24 May 12, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Oct 11, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Military Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 15 Feb 12, w/atch. Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 12 Mar 12, w/atchs.