RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2016-01550

	COUNSEL: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

	HEARING: YES

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.   His Under Honorable Conditions (General) discharge be upgraded to Honorable.

2.  His Air Force Academy debt be waived, or in the alternative, he be allowed to serve on active duty as a means to repay his debt.
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was unfairly treated throughout the disciplinary process.  His misconduct was the product of extenuating and stressful circumstances that were beyond his control and were not so egregious as to prohibit him from continuing to serve.  He incurred an increased debt due the Academy’s delay in the decision to disenroll him.  He is fit and able to serve.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a former Air Force Academy Cadet; he entered the Academy on 1 Jul 05.  On 30 Apr 09, the applicant was disenrolled from the Academy for a repeated pattern of misconduct.  During his time at the Academy, he received four Letters of Reprimand (LORs), as follows:  using marijuana; being behind closed doors with a female cadet; consuming alcohol and an having an unprofessional relationship with a female cadet; and failing to obey a lawful order. He also received two Letters of Admonishment (LOAs) for disobeying an order and having an unauthorized visitor in the cadet area, which resulted in an Unfavorable Information File (UIF).  He also received a Letter of Counseling (LOC) for failing to complete a probation project.  He was on academic, aptitude, and conduct probation.  On 13 Oct 09, he received a discharge Under Honorable Conditions (General).  For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

USAFA/JA recommends denying the application.  The applicant did not submit his request within the three-year statutory period and he provides no plausible explanation for failing to do so.  Further, there was no evidence of an error or injustice occurring during the applicant’s disenrollment and discharge processing.  Nor is there any evidence to support returning him to active duty or to waive his debt.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit C.

SAF/MRBR recommends denying the portion of the applicant’s request to waive his debt.  The applicant did not exhaust other remedies available via the Air Force Financial Services Center (AFFSC) and the Remissions Board (SAF/MRB) before applying to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (the Board).  The complete advisory is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent a copy of the Air Force evaluation to the applicant on 3 Jul 18 for comment (Exhibit E), but has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was not timely filed.

2.  As noted below, for part of his request, the applicant failed to exhaust all available avenues of non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.  After thoroughly reviewing all Exhibits, it is the Board’s opinion that the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s record.

	3.a. Regarding his request for debt relief, the applicant did not exhaust all available avenues of non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.  The Board does not consider applications without documentation showing exhaustion of such avenues of relief.

	3.b. Regarding his request for a discharge characterization upgrade, the Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of USAFA/JA and finds that a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions to upgrade his discharge.  The Board also notes the applicant did not file the application within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered, or should have been discovered, as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552, and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR).  Moreover, the applicant has offered no plausible reason for the delay in filing the application.  The Board finds the application untimely and concludes it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay.

4.  The applicant has not shown that a personal appearance, with or without counsel, will materially add to the Board’s understanding of the issues involved.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The applicant be informed the application was not timely filed; it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay; and the application will only be reconsidered upon receipt of relevant evidence not already considered by the Board.

The application was adjudicated without a personal appearance.

CERTIFICATION:

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2016-01550 in Executive Session on 6 Sep 18:

, Panel Chair
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

All members voted not to correct the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 4 Apr 16.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, USAFA/JA, dated 20 Sep 16.
Exhibit D:	Advisory opinion, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Feb 18.
Exhibit E:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 3 Jul 18.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.