RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:BC-2015 -03865	COUNSEL:	NONE
HEARING DESIRED:	NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Under Other Than Honorable	Conditions	(UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to an Honorable Discharge.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The. DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, that is currently filed in his official military records is incorrect. At the time of his discharge he was given a discharge certificate where the Character of Service recorded the discharge as UOTHC; however, after previous allegations of misconduct were dismissed, he was given a replacement DD Form 214 reflecting a Character of Service as Honorable. He was unaware that the updated version was not on file and that he was supposed to send the corrected DD Form 214 to military personnel to update his records.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant  initially. entered  the Regular Air  Force  on
21 May 97.
On 15 Apr 03, the applicant submitted a request for "Discharge In
Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial" to his commander for ap·proval. The applicant indicated in his request that he understood that he could be discharged with an UOTHC discharge. He submitted the request based on the following charges: . Charge I, Violation of Article 92, "Failure to Obey an Order" and Charge II, Violation of Article 112a, "Wrongful use of Methamphetamine."

On 16 ·Apr 03, the· applicant' s commander signed a memorandum requesting the request for a discharge in lieu of court-martial be approved and recommended that the applicant be given an UOTHC discharge due to the serious nature of his misconduct.

On 18 Apr 03, the discharge authority granted the request for discharge in lieu. of court-martial and directed that the applicant 's service characterization be UOTHC.

On 21 Apr 03, AF Form 100, Request and Authorizat on for Separation, directs · that the. applicant was discharged effective 22 Apr 03 with UOTHC as the character of service.	i

A pull from the Automated Record Management System ,£. (ARMS), provides a copy of the applicant 's DD Form 214 and indcates that he was furnished an UOTHC and credited with 5 yeais, 11l months, and 1 day of active service.

On 2 Aug 16, the applicant was advised that AFI 36-2603, Aiir Force Board for Correction of Military Records, paragraph" 4.7.3, requires that if an applicant has not . exhausted ·all available administrative remedies, the application will be denie by the Board on that basis. The applicant was invited to administratively close hig case until such time that he is able to avail himself of the administrative avenues. As of this date, no response has been received.	:

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

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DP2STM-SEP recommends denial for timeliness as it has been 13 years since .the applicant 's discharge and he did not provide a valid reason for not submitting an earlier appli.cation within 3 year of the alleged error or injustibe.

In response to the applicant 's contention , DP2STM-SEP recognizes that he provided a DD Form 214 (Member 4 copy) indicating that he was given an honorable service characterization. However, the DD Form 214 located in the :applicant 's maste·r of personnel records is the official document that must be considered and it reflects a UOTHC characterization. · Additionally, the applicant 's records clearty show . :that the commander and the discharge authority directed an UOTHC discharqe ervice characterization. The discharge authority approved the discharge on 18 Apr 03 and the applicant was immediately separated on 22 Apr 03, while subsequently being banned from re-entering the installation. We found no evidence in the record to indicate that either the commander or the base discharge authority granted any higher service characterization. However, should the board elect to grant the applicant '.s request based on clemency, the applicant 's record should be corrected to show that the character of service is changed to. reflect "Under Honorable Conditions (General)."

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

AFPC/DP2STM (DD-214) recommends that the board determine the service characterization for subsequent actions to void the service copy DD Form 214, notify the applicant the sJatus of the Honorable DD Form 214, or reissue a new DD Form 214 as appropriate to record a different classificatiori. In this regard, after review of the applicant 's military record, they found that his . file contained the UOTHC DD Form 214, but did not contain the Honorable version. However, it was determined by expe.rt opinion that the Honorable DD Form 214, provided by the applicant, was in fact an authentic copy. The applicant is under the assumption his discharge is Honorable and no longer UOTHC. While the UOTHC DD Form 214 is considered the 'official 'DD Form 214 for the Service, presently, both DD· Form 214s (for the same time frame) are 'official 'in nature. The applicant has and is subject to use the Honorable DD Form 214 for benefits/entitlements.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DP2STM (DD-214) evaluation is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applic::ant on 03 Aug 16 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1.	The applicant has not exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.	The application was timely filed.

3.	Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice In this respect, we note this Board is the highest administrative level of appeal within the Air Force. As such, an applicant must first exhaust all available avenues of administrative relief provided· by existing law or regulations prior to $eeking relief before this Board, as required by the governing Air Force Instruction. As you were advised on 2 Aug 16, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) is the first level of review for those who are seeking a change to the characterization of service and/or narrative reason for discharge and reenlistment code. If you are not satisfied with the results of the AFDRB, you may then submit an application to the AFBCR. In view of this, we find this application is not ripe for adjudication at 'this level as there exists a subordinate level of appeal that has not first been depleted. Therefore, in view of the above, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that all available avenues of administrative relief have not been exhausted; and the ·application will only be reconsidered upon submission of documentary evidence indicating that said avenues of administrative relief have be-en exhausted.

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-03865 in Executive Session on 01 November 2016 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

Panel Chair 
Member
Member

The	following	documentary_	evidence	pertaining	to AFBCMR	Docket Number BC-2015-03865 was considered:

Exhibit A . Exhibit B. Exhibit C. Exhibit D. Exhibit E.

DD Form 149, dated 3 Sep 15, w/atchs. Applicant's Master Personnel Records: Memorandum, AFPC/PP2STM-SEP, dated 18 May 16.
Memorandum, AFPC/DP2STM-DD214, dated 26 Oct 16.
Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Aug 16.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603	( itle 32 Code of Federal · Regulations, Part 865.1}, it is certified_ that a quorum was present· at the Board's. review and deliberations, and that the .foregoing is
a true and complete record.of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.	·