RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02829

      					COUNSEL:  NONE

					HEARING DESIRED:  YES



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His name be included in the official list of United States Air 
Force Academy (USAFA) graduates, class of 1966.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was judged too harshly after self-admitting to an honor code 
violation and should have been given a second chance to continue 
on to graduation.  During his third-year, alone in a classroom, he 
was about to turn in a test when he looked at another cadet’s test 
on the instructor’s desk.  He changed his answer to one question 
based on the answer seen on the other cadet’s test.  At the 
beginning of his fourth-year, his fellow cadets appointed him to 
the honor committee.  More than a year after the answer-changing 
occurred, he self-admitted to this one-time error in judgment.  He 
believes, because he was now an honor committee representative, 
his punishment was more severe than other cadets received for 
similar offenses.  He had personally witnessed several cadets 
receive second chances for incidents like his; first-offense, 
self-reported, and minor in nature.  Further, there was no appeal 
process, at the time, and he had no option other than resignation.  
He notes current honor violation procedures at the USAFA appear to 
provide second chances and believes he deserves one too.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 25 Jun 63, the applicant entered the USAFA.

On 5 Apr 66, the applicant voluntarily tendered his resignation as 
a cadet appointed to USAFA.

On 25 Apr 66, the applicant’s separation from the USAFA was 
approved, with an honorable character of service.

On 28 Apr 66, according to the DD Form 785, Record of 
Disenrollment from Officer Candidate-Type Training, the applicant 
was disenrolled for breach of Cadet Honor Code.  The specific act 
was self-admitted cheating.  The approval authority commended his 
personal integrity and recommended him for future officer training 

On 12 Aug 13, according to information provided by the applicant, 
he wrote to the USAFA Commandant of Cadets, requesting inclusion 
to the USAFA list of graduates for the class of 1966.

On 20 Nov 13, according to information provided by the applicant, 
the USAFA Commandant of Cadets replied to the applicant directly, 
explaining the presumptive punishment for honor violations and the 
evolution of discretion and probation as they relate to possible 
alternatives to disenrollment from the USAFA.  The Commandant of 
Cadets subsequently referred the applicant to the AFBCMR process.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of 
primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

USAFA/A1A, in coordination with the Director of Student Affairs 
and Academy Registrar Office, recommends denial, indicating there 
is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  USAFAI 36-3504, 
Disenrollment of United States Air Force Academy Cadets, dated 
21 Aug 13 states violations of the Cadet Wing Honor Code will 
normally be processed according to procedures in the USAFA Cadet 
Wing Honor Code Reference Handbook.  According to the USAFA Cadet 
Wing Honor Code Reference Handbook, the presumptive sanction for 
an honor violation is disenrollment; only under extraordinary 
circumstances may a lesser sanction be recommended.  The decision 
of the applicant’s Honor Board was to support that presumptive 
sanction.  Further, the applicant voluntarily resigned prior to 
graduation.  By resigning, the applicant did not complete USAFA's 
graduation requirements and therefore did not earn a degree from 
the USAFA and commission in the Air Force.

A complete copy of the USAFA/A1A evaluation is at Exhibit C.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant does not refute the matter of record of his 
disenrollment; however, he affirms the severity of the punishment 
is the injustice.  He highlights the unfairness of not getting a 
second chance and USAFA’s lack of an appeal process, at the time 
of his disenrollment.  He states he has completed his degree and 
volunteers to complete the final sixty days of cadet time to 
fulfill any remaining obligation as a USAFA cadet.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD:

After careful consideration of applicant’s request and the 
available evidence of record, we find the application untimely.  
Applicant did not file within three years after the alleged error 
or injustice was discovered as required by Title 10, United States 
Code, Section 1552 and Air Force Instruction 36-2603.  Applicant 
has not shown a plausible reason for the delay in filing, and we 
are not persuaded that the record raises issues of error or 
injustice which require resolution on the merits.  Thus, we cannot 
conclude it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the 
applicant’s failure to file in a timely manner.


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the 
interest of justice to waive the untimeliness.  It is the decision 
of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as untimely.


The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number 
BC-2014-02829 in Executive Session on 25 Mar 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 21 Jun 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, USAFA/A1A, dated 7 Jan 15.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Jan 15.
      	Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 12 Feb 15, w/atchs.