RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-04730

  						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Undesirable discharge be upgraded to at least a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge.  

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His worries for his small children and his blind, sick mother hindered his ability to meet his full potential in the military.  Furthermore, he received a DD Form 303AF, Certificate in Lieu of Lost or Destroyed Discharge, issued 26 Sep 02 from the National Personnel Records Center, which states Honorable Discharge and requests whether or not the certificate qualifies him for Department of Veterans Affairs’ benefits.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 26 Apr 55. 

On 11 Oct 55, the applicant pled guilty and was convicted at a Summary Court-Martial falsely making, with the intent to deceive, a temporary automobile permit in violation of Article 134, UCMJ.

On 2 Dec 55, the applicant received an Article 15 for failure to go in violation of Article 86, UCMJ.  

On 12 Dec 55, the applicant received a second Article 15 for failure to go.  

On 28 Dec 55, the applicant applied for discharge without undergoing discharge board proceedings.  

On 6 Feb 56, the applicant was furnished an Undesirable discharge, and was credited with 9 months and 11 days of active service.   

On 13 Oct 15, according to documents provided by the applicant, the Air Force Discharge Review Board notified the applicant that his request for an upgrade discharge could not be processed because his discharge was more than 15 years ago.  

On 8 Apr 16, a request for post-service information was forwarded 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 remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits D and E.  

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial indicating the application is untimely and there is no evidence of an error or injustice that tends to undermine the sentence adjudged at his Summary Court-Martial or the punishments imposed by his two Article 15 actions.  Furthermore, the applicant has not raised any new evidence or allegation of injustice which tends to cast doubt on his administrative discharge.  

A complete copy of the AFLOA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/JA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  Even though the applicant presented some evidence that he was under substantial family-related stressors during his time in the Air Force, the evidence does not support a finding of injustice in his records.  A court-martial conviction and two non-judicial punishment actions are more than enough to support an administrative discharge action.  The applicant has not raised any new evidence or allegation of injustice which tends to cast doubt on his administrative discharge.  Though the legal review of the discharge action is not included in the case file, the Board may rely on the presumption of regularity to determine that all processing requirements were met.  The waiver memorandum signed by the applicant is sufficient to ensure he was provided notice, an opportunity to respond and present evidence at a board, was advised by counsel, and that he voluntarily submitted an application to be discharged without the benefit of a discharge board.  Furthermore, it is unclear why the National Personnel Records Center issued a DD Form 303AF indicating that the applicant received an Honorable discharge.  The records do not support the applicant received an Honorable discharge.  AFPC/JA believes that document to have been issued in error as the applicant’s records clearly demonstrate that his service was characterized as undesirable.

A complete copy of the AFPC/JA evaluation is at Exhibit E.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 16 Jun 16 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit F).  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 an error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPRs) and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or an injustice and the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances.  Furthermore, the Board agrees with AFPC/JA that the National Personnel Records Center issued DD Form 303AF indicating that the applicant received an Honorable discharge is in error as the records do not support the applicant received an Honorable discharge and clearly demonstrate that his service was characterized as Undesirable.  Nevertheless, it is outside the Board’s purview to correct a record generated outside of the Air Force.  In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, based on the evidence before us, the Board finds no basis to grant clemency at this time.  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 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-2015-04730 in Executive Session on 28 Mar 17 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Oct 15, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 8 Apr 16, w/atch.
Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 8 Jun 16.
Exhibit E.  Memorandum, AFPC/JA, dated 14 Jun 16.
	Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 16 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.