RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-04307

						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His discharge was improper because he was not given any counseling, a plan, an opportunity to develop discipline, or time to improve his choices.  

He was raised in a single parent home without a positive male role model.  The military had no mechanism to influence or guide young men and he followed the wrong examples.  After his discharge he avoided negative influences and earned a degree in the field of nursing.  He is the founder and president of a non-profit organization and provides mentoring to young men.  

He regrets some of the choices he made while serving on active duty and did not fully comprehend the great opportunity provided for him.  He has stayed out of trouble and has built a successful marriage and professional career.  

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 4 June 1971.  

According to ADC Form 263, Supervisor’s Record of Airman Counseling, the applicant received counseling on several occasions for various reasons during the period of 18 October 1971 through 12 November 1973.  

On 5 January 1972, the applicant received non-judicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) in violation of Article 134, for wrongfully having in his possession a military identification card issued to another airman.  

On 12 January 1972, the applicant’s first sergeant advised the military personnel flight of a suggested new commencement period of after 16 June 1972 for the applicant’s Good Conduct Medal, due to his NJP action under Article 15, UCMJ.  

On 12 November 1973, the applicant received NJP under Article 15 of the UCMJ in violation of Article 121, for stealing a Panasonic cassette tape player.  

On 16 November 1973, the applicant entered a guilty plea to the possession of marijuana in his court proceedings.  He was fined $100.00 plus court cost and given a suspended six month jail sentence.  

On 13 December 1973, according to the applicant commander’s report, he recommended to the wing commander that the applicant be issued a general discharge certificate due to his misconduct and civil court disposition.  The specific reasons for the action were as follows:

	a)  His violation of Article 121, UCMJ.  

	b)  He interfered with the security police in the performance of their duty by using provocative speech and gestures.  

	c)  He left an insecure government vehicle by leaving the keys in the ignition.  

	d)  His violation of Article 134, UCMJ.  

On 13 December 1973, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for his misconduct and civil court disposition.  

On 13 December 1973, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the recommended discharge action, waived his right to a hearing before an administrative board and submitted statements on his own behalf. 

On 18 December 1973, the case was found to be legally sufficient.

On 4 January 1974, the discharge authority directed the applicant be furnished a general discharge certificate.  

On 7 January 1974, the applicant was furnished a general (under honorable conditions) discharge and was credited with two years, seven months, and four days of total active service.

On 9 March 2016, a request for post-service information was forwarded to applicant for comment (Exhibit C).  In response, the applicant submitted documentation which indicates that according to the Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) Division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), a search of the fingerprints provided by the applicant revealed prior arrest data at the FBI, effective 4 July 2016.  The applicant reiterated that he deeply regrets the immature and irresponsible decision that he made.  However, in spite of his mistake, he learned discipline, respect, courage, and learned how to work.  In addition he submitted character letters of support (Exhibit D).  

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, based on the evidence of record, we cannot conclude the applicant’s activities since leaving the service are sufficient to overcome the misconduct which formed the basis of his separation.  Therefore, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought by the applicant.  

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-2015-04307 in Executive Session on 1 December 2016 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-04307 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 October 2015, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR, 9 March 2016, w/atch.  
	Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant’s Response, dated 27 July 
                 2016, w/atchs.  

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.