RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05729

			COUNSEL:  NONE

			HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His record be corrected to full honorable due to the fact that he was a very young age at the time of the incident.  Prior to 
his tour in Cuba, he was a bright airman with military career aspirations. He self-medicated with alcohol after what he 
witnessed in Cuba. He felt he was unjustly punished. He has been a productive citizen since.    

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 18 Jun 93.

On 15 Mar 96, the applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to recommend his discharge for Misconduct:  conduct 
prejudicial to good order and discipline, under the provisions of AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, Section H, Paragraph 5.50.2.  The 
reasons for the action were one instance of failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty and one instance 
of failing to obey a lawful order to report to duty, for which he was twice punished under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).

On 29 Feb 96, the suspended portion of the nonjudicial 
punishment related to a reduction to the grade of airman (E-2) 
was vacated and the demotion action was executed.  The reasons 
for this action were the applicant disobeyed a lawful order by 
using his United States government American Express credit card 
for personal expenses, wrongful possession of an alcoholic 
beverage while under the age of twenty-one, and overindulged in 
intoxicating liquor or drugs incapacitating him from the proper 
performance of his duties.  
On 29 Mar 96, the discharge case was found legally sufficient 
and the discharge authority approved the commander’s 
recommendation on 1 Apr 96, directing the applicant’s discharge.

On 3 Apr 96, the applicant was furnished a general (under 
honorable conditions) discharge, and was credited with 2 years, 
9 months, and 16 days of active service.   

On 15 Oct 14, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 
30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C).

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 an 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 for us to conclude that the applicant’s post-service activities warrant such consideration.  Therefore, in the 
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis 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-2013-05729 in Executive Session on 21 Nov 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 Dec 13, w/atch.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 15 Oct 14.