RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-04291

						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He requested a full trial but was refused for lack of evidence.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant was commissioned in the grade of second lieutenant on 14 Apr 81.

On 16 Jun 87, the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (OSI) completed a Report of Investigation (ROI) on the applicant for rape, conduct unbecoming of an officer and adultery.

On 11 Sep 87, the base Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) did not see evidence in the accusation of rape due to a continuous personal relationship between the applicant and his accuser.  SJA recommended against action under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) but, recommended initiating discharge action under AFR 36-2, Administrative Discharge Procedures.

On 4 Nov 87, the applicant’s wing commander initiated a Notification of Action under AFR 36-2, chapter 3, paragraph 3-7d (serious or recurring misconduct punishable by military or civilian authorities) on the grounds of adulterous liaison and making unwelcomed sexual advances upon another female, not his wife.  An option was extended to the applicant for voluntary retirement, if eligible or tender resignation.

On 10 Nov 87, the applicant acknowledged the Notification of Action.  He declined to tender his resignation.

On 12 Dec 87, the applicant received a referral Officer Evaluation Report (OER) covering the period 13 Dec 86 through 12 Dec 87 for “involvement with an Air Force enlisted man’s wife.”

On 23 Dec 87, the applicant was notified by his major command of discharge action under AFR 36-2 and there was sufficient evidence to require him to show cause for retention.

On 21 Jan 88, the applicant reserved his right to present evidence before a Board of Inquiry (BOI).  The applicant declined military legal counsel, but obtained civilian council.

On 16 Mar 88, the Secretary of the Air Force (SECAF), ordered a BOI to evaluate and recommend disposition.

On 13-15 Apr 88, the BOI determined the findings were consistent with allegations and recommended separation with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge.

On 18 Apr 88, the applicant received a referral OER covering the period 13 Dec 87 through 18 Apr 88 for engaging in business during duty hours, responding in a volatile manner, and making unwelcome advances to a female.

On 11 Jul 88, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the BOI Notice of Rights under AFR 36-2 from base SJA.

On 20 Jul 88, the applicant requested a 30-day delay to gather additional evidence, but he never submitted anything.

On 8 Aug 88, the applicant’s major command SJA provided legal review and concurred with the BOI findings and recommendations and recommended SECAF approval.

On 22 Sep 88, the Air Force Board recommended the applicant be separated with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge.  

On 17 Oct 88, the SECAF directed the applicant be discharged with a general discharge.

On 4 Nov 88, the applicant was furnished a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge, with a Narrative Reason for Separation of “Involuntary Discharge:  Misconduct, moral or professional dereliction:  Serious or recurring misconduct,” and was credited with 17 years, 4 months, and 21 days of active service.

On 16 Sep 16, a request for post-service information was forwarded along with Clemency guidelines 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 do not find the documentation presented sufficient to conclude the applicant has been the victim of an error or injustice.  While the applicant contends he requested a full trial but was refused for lack of evidence, we find no evidence to substantiate this contention.  Based on the evidence before us, it appears the applicant’s General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation in effect at the time and within the commander’s discretionary authority.  In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, the applicant did not submit supporting documentation concerning his post-service activities to determine if his 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 requested relief.

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-2015-04291 in Executive Session on 8 Dec 16 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-04291 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 05 OCT 15.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 16 SEP 16 w/attach.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 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.