RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-03147

  						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His narrative reason for separation be changed to force shaping or convenience of the government and his Reentry (RE) code of 2B - (Separated with a General or Under-Other-Than-Honorable-Conditions discharge) be changed in order to enter another branch of service.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He received an administrative discharge but the DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, states “Misconduct (Serious Offense).”  His discharge was not part of his court martial and he qualified to be discharged under force shaping prior to his special court-martial. 

In support of his request, he provides a copy of his DD Form 214 and a Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) report.  

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 6 Sep 05.

On 15 Mar 06, his commander imposed punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), consisting of a forfeiture of $300.00 pay for failing to remain on station during duty hours while in Phase III status.  

On 16 Oct 06, his commander imposed punishment under Article 15, UCMJ, consisting of a reduction to the grade of Airman Basic (suspended through 15 Apr 07), forfeiture of $200.00 pay per month for two months, and 30 days extra duty for falsely making official long distance calls that were actually personal in nature of a value of about $175.00 of long distance phone services.  

On or about 27 Mar 07, he pleaded guilty to and was convicted at a special court-martial of 12 specifications of larceny and one specification of obtaining services under false pretenses.  His sentence consisted of reduction in grade to E-1, forfeiture of $500.00 per month for three months, and seven months confinement.

On 22 Jun 07, his commander recommended him for a General (under honorable conditions) discharge.  On 26 Jul 07, the discharge authority approved the applicant discharge, without probation and rehabilitation (P&R).

On 3 Jul 07, the applicant was furnished an “Under Honorable Conditions (General)” discharge, a 2B reentry code, and a narrative reason for separation of “Misconduct (Serious Offense),” and credited with 1 year, 8 months, and 27 days of active service.   

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPRs), which are attached at Exhibit C and D.    

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DP2STM-SEP recommends denial indicating the application was not timely filed and there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  The applicant contends that he should not have been separated based on his special court-martial conviction because discharge was not the punishment that was handed down by the court-martial convening authority.  The fact the court-martial sentence didn’t include discharging the applicant doesn’t preclude the commander from initiating administrative discharge proceedings upon its conclusion which is within the commander’s authority.  A general discharge characterization is warranted when “significant negative aspects of the airman’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the airman’s military record.  The commander indicated the applicant was a below average airman who had received two Article 15 actions taken against him prior to his eventual court-martial and that all of these transgressions took place during his short career in the Air Force.  

A complete copy of the AFPC/DP2STM-SEP evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DP3ST recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  DP3ST verified he was involuntarily discharged for Misconduct (Serious Offense) with a general character of service and his RE code 2B is correct and required for a general character of service.  

A complete copy of the AFPC/DP3ST evaluation is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states his application was not timely filed because of hardships he faced after discharge; no stable address, divorce, lost his belongings, a victim of an active shooter incident, whiplash victim of a car crash, a felony probation, and wrongful conviction of aggravated assault on police officers.  In support of his rebuttal, he provides a written statement and the police report on the aggravated assault conviction.

A complete copy of the applicant’s rebuttal, with attachments, is at Exhibit F.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD:

Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  After a careful review of the applicant's contentions, documentation submitted in support of the request, and the available evidence of record, we are not convinced the applicant has provided sufficient evidence for us to conclude that he is the victim of an error or injustice.  We also note the applicant did not file the application within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered, or should have been discovered, as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552 and Air Force Instruction 36-2603.  Therefore, because we do not find it would be in the interest of justice to recommend granting relief, and the applicant has offered no plausible reason for the delay in filing the application, we cannot conclude it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file the application.  Accordingly, we find the application untimely.

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-2015-03147 in Executive Session on 14 Jul 16 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 13 Jul 15, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DP2STM-SEP, dated 11 Dec 15.
	Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DP3ST, dated 24 Feb 16.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 7 Mar 16.
	Exhibit F.  Applicant’s Rebuttal, dated 1 Apr 16, w/atchs.