RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02966 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded tohonorable. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Since the incident he has had a complete change of character. His volunteer work and actions in his current and previous jobsreflect overall improvement. He received many performance awards as a government contractor. The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is atExhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 27 Jun 85, the applicant entered active duty in the RegularAir Force. On 8 Apr 88, the applicant was notified by his squadron commanderthat he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force forconduct prejudicial to good order and discipline. The basis for the proposed action were: 1) On 4 Jan 87, he received a Letterof Counseling (LOC) for being derelict in his duties; 2) On17 and 24 Mar 87, he received a Letter of Reprimands (LORs) forbeing derelict in his duties; (3) On 8 Apr 87, he received anArticle 15 for unlawfully making a false statement while underoath and failure to go; and (4) On 8 Mar 88, he received anArticle 15 for being an accomplice to larceny of Governmentproperty. On 8 Apr 88, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge and, waived his right to consult withlegal counsel and submit a statement in his own behalf. The base legal office reviewed the case and found it legallysufficient to support separation and recommended that he receivea general discharge without probation and rehabilitation. On 17 May 88, the applicant was discharged under the provisionsof AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen, for Misconduct-Pattern of Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order andDiscipline, and received a general discharge. He served on active duty for a period of 2 years, 10 months and 21 days. On 9 Jan 90, the applicant applied to the Air Force DischargeReview Board (AFDRB) requesting that his discharge be upgraded tohonorable. After reviewing the evidence of record, the AFDRBconcluded that no change in his discharge was warranted. Pursuant to the request of the Board on 3 Aug 12, the FederalBureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, indicated on7 Aug 12, that, on the basis of the data furnished, they wereunable to locate an arrest record. On 31 Dec 12, a request for information pertaining to his postservice activities was forwarded to the applicant for responsewithin 30 days (Exhibit C). As of this date, no response hasbeen received by this office. THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existinglaw or regulations. 2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in theinterest 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 thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we find no evidenceto indicate that his discharge from the Air Force was inappropriate, or that the actions taken to affect his dischargeand the characterization of his service were improper, contraryto the provisions of the governing regulations in effect at thetime, or based on factors other than his own behavior andinability to comply with standards. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to recommendgranting the relief sought on that basis. In the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did notdemonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; thatthe application was denied without a personal appearance; andthat the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not consideredwith this application. 2 The following members of the Board considered Docket NumberBC-2012-02966 in Executive Session on 14 Feb 13, under theprovisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Jun 12, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 31 Dec 12.