RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02314 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was never afforded an opportunity to undergo rehabilitation like other service members with similar circumstance. He has become a model citizen, obtained his Bachelor of Science (BS) degree and received several academic awards. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release and Discharge from Active Duty, issued in conjunction with his 18 Jul 85 separation; Associates and Bachelor of Science degree certificates, and other supporting documents. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 14 Dec 79, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force for a period of four years. On 20 Jun 85, the squadron commander notified the applicant of administrative discharge action for a pattern of misconduct. The specific reasons for the proposed action were: On 22 Jan 85, he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for being incapable of performing his assigned duties because he had been drinking. On 18 May 85, he received an Article 15 for being incapable of performing his assigned duties, resulting from wrongful previous overindulgence of intoxicating liquor or drugs. His punishment consisted of a reduction to the grade of airman first class with a Date of Rank (DOR) of 31 May 85. After consulting with counsel and having been advised of his rights, the applicant waived his right to submit statements in his own behalf. The staff judge advocate found the case file legally sufficient and recommended the applicant receive a general discharge without P&R. On 11 Jul 85, the discharge authority approved the general discharge without P&R. On 18 Jul 85, the applicant was discharged by reason of misconduct – pattern discreditable involvement with military and civilian authorities, with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). He was credited with five years, seven months, and five day of active duty service. The applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to have his discharge upgraded; however, the AFDRB denied his application. They concluded the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, was within the discretion of the discharge authority (see AFDRB Hearing Record at Exhibit B). ________________________________________________________________ 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 during the discharge process. 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 sufficient evidence to persuade us that an upgrade to a fully honorable discharge is warranted 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-2012-02314 in Executive Session on 15 January 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 24 May 12, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.