RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-04506

  						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His discharge be upgraded to Honorable and appropriately change the separation and reenlistment codes.  

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He is seeking employment with the United States Government and will not qualify for the job with his present separation code and character of service.  Since his separation from the Air Force, he has earned his associates degree, been an AT&T manager, and presently trying to obtain employment at Scott AFB, Illinois.  

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 15 May 86. 

On 20 Nov 86, the applicant received a letter of reprimand (LOR) for conducting himself in a manner prejudicial to good order and discipline when apprehended by security police in the company of a married woman.  

On 26 Nov 86, the applicant received a LOR with an unfavorable information file (UIF) for failing to go to his appointed place of duty.

On 10 and 11 Dec 86, the applicant received LORs for being late for work.

On 22 Dec 86, the applicant received counseling for parking illegally.  

On 21 Jan 87, the applicant received counseling for writing checks with insufficient funds.  

On 6 Feb 87, he received an Article 15 for operating a vehicle while drunk.

On 13 Feb 87, the applicant received a LOR with UIF for failing to go to his appointed place of duty.  

On 24 Feb 87, the applicant received a LOR with UIF for breaking a window in his quarters and making false statements concerning how the window was broken.

On 2 Mar 87, the applicant’s discharge action was initiated.  

On 13 Mar 87, the administrative discharge action was found to be legally sufficient (contingent on completion of the medical examination).  

On 18 Mar 87, the 475th Air Base Wing Commander approved the applicant’s discharge action.

On 1 May 87, the applicant was furnished a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge, and was credited with 11 months and 17 days of active service.  

A request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant on 3 Feb 16 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C).  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 applicant was not timely filed.  While the applicant claims a date of discovery of less than three years ago, in our view, the reasonable date of discovery of the alleged error or injustice was more than three years ago and the application is therefore untimely; 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 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. We conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances.  In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, the documentation the applicant provided stating he has earned his associates degree and has been employed since separating from the Air Force was insufficient for the Board to determine his accomplishments since leaving the service is sufficiently meritorious to overcome the misconduct for which he was discharged.  However, the Board would be willing to reconsider his appeal should he provide new and relevant information relative to his claim.  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-2015-04506 in Executive Session 9 Feb 17 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 16 Oct 15, w/atch.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 20 Jun 16.

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