RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03190 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded to Honorable. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was an excellent Airman and all Enlisted Performance Reports and Feedback Worksheets reflect that fact. He admits that he made a mistake and learned from the experience. In support of his request, the applicant provided copies of two AF Form 910s, Enlisted Performance Report (AB thru TSgt) which closed out 24 Jun 95 and 24 Jun 96 and copies of AF Form 931, AB Thru TSgt Feedback Worksheets, dated 21 Jan 97, 22 Apr 97 and 25 Aug 97. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 4 Oct 93. On 22 Jun 97, the applicant accepted an Article 15, Nonjudicial Punishment, for writing a bad check in violation of Article 123a, Uniform Code of Military Justice. He was reduced in grade to airman first class. On 14 Apr 98, the applicant accepted an Article 15, Nonjudicial Punishment, for dishonorably failing to maintain sufficient funds in his checking account on three separate occasions in violation of Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice. He was reduced in grade to airman basic. On 27 Apr 98, the applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to recommend him for discharge based on unsatisfactory performance involving irresponsibility in the management of personal finances. The authority for this action is AFI 36- 3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, Chapter 5, paragraph 5.26.4. The commander recommended the applicant’s service be characterized as General (Under Honorable Conditions). On 30 Apr 98, the applicant consulted legal counsel and waived his right to submit statements on his behalf. On 23 Jun 98, the Staff Judge Advocate reviewed the administrative discharge package and found it legally sufficient and recommended approval. The discharge authority approved the administrative discharge with a service characterization of General (Under Honorable Conditions). Probation and rehabilitation was not granted. On 6 Jul 98, the applicant was furnished a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge, and was credited with 4 years, 8 months, and 29 days of active service. A request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant on 20 Mar 15 for review and comment within 30 days. 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 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, in the absence of any evidence related to the applicant’s post-service activities, there is no way for us to determine if the applicant’s accomplishments since leaving the service are sufficiently meritorious to overcome the misconduct for which he was discharged. 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-2014-03190 in Executive Session on 25 Jun 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-03190 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 22 Jul 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Clemency Information Bulletin.