RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04552 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was told his discharge would be upgraded to honorable after six months and he needs a new DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, reflecting the change. The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 12 May 1981, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force for a period of four years. On 17 Apr 1984, his commander notified him that he was recommending his separation from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen. The specific reasons for this action were: On 15 Jan 1982 he received a letter of counseling for failure to go. On 23 Jan 1982, he assaulted three Air Force members and was court-martialed. He was sentenced to four months at hard labor, ordered to forfeit $300 of his pay for three months, and reduced to the grade of Airman Basic (E-1). On 23 Jul 1983 he received a letter of reprimand for failure to go. On 4 Nov 1983, he assaulted two members of the Boxing Team, inflicting grievous bodily harm upon one. He was again court- martialed and was sentenced to perform 45 days hard labor, without confinement, and reduced to the grade of Airman (E-2). On 17 Apr 1984, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the notice of discharge. On 18 Apr 1984, the applicant offered a conditional waiver of his rights associated with an administrative discharge board hearing. This waiver was contingent on his receipt of no less than a general discharge if the recommendation for his discharge was approved. On 26 Apr 1984, the Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient. On 7 May 1984, the commander rejected the applicant’s conditional waiver of administrative board proceedings. On 10 May 1984 the applicant was advised of his rights to an administrative discharge board, military counsel, and to submit statements on his own behalf. On 5 Jun 1984, his commander notified him that he was still recommending his discharge without probation and rehabilitation under the same provisions, however, due to further evidence presented to him by the SJA, he recommended that his service be characterized as general. Therefore, he was not entitled to present his case before an administrative discharge board. On 6 June 1984, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification and waived his right to submit statements. On 13 Jun 1984, the SJA submitted an addendum to his legal review and recommended the applicant be discharged with a general discharge without probation and rehabilitation. On 16 Jul 1984, the applicant was discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions) in the grade of airman. He served 2 years, 11 months and 12 days of total active service. He accumulated 83 days lost time between the period 5 Mar 1982 through 27 May 1982. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provided a copy of an Investigative Report, (Exhibit C). On 3 Apr 2012, a copy of the FBI report and a request for post- service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D), as of this date, no response has been received by this office. ________________________________________________________________ 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. In the interest of justice, 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 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 31 May 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC- 2011-04552: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Nov 2011. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. FBI Report, dated 11 Jan 2012. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 3 Apr 2012.