RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2016-02286

	COUNSEL: NONE

	HEARING: NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His discharge Under Other than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to a discharge Under Honorable Conditions (General).

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was not provided a mental health evaluation prior to his court-martial or an opportunity for retraining, unlike others who were Caucasian and who committed more serious offenses than he committed.  He believes the judge presiding on his case was prejudiced and racist.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a former airman basic who enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 30 Oct 73.

During the period 1974 to 1975, the applicant received three nonjudicial punishment actions under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  These were for failure to go to his appointed place of duty and being absent without leave (AWOL).  

On 23 Dec 75, a special court-martial convicted the applicant of being AWOL from 24 Jun 75 to 19 Dec 75.  The court sentenced him to a BCD, reduction in rank to E-1, confinement for four months, and forfeiture of $200 pay per month for four months.  On review, the appellate court affirmed the findings and sentence.  On 22 Jun 76, the convening authority ordered applicant’s BCD be executed.

On 28 Jun 76, apparently in error, the applicant received an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge.  He was credited with 1 year, 9 months and 21 days of active service. 

On 22 Aug 16, the Board sent a request for post-service information and a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) background check to the applicant (Exhibit C), but has not received a response.

On 22 Dec 16, AFPC/DP2STM notified the applicant that his DD Form 214 erroneously reflects his characterization of service as UOTHC; and that it will be administratively corrected to reflect the discharge he received as a result of his Special Court-Martial in Jun 76. 

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisories at Exhibits D, F and G.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFLOA/JAJM recommends denying the application.  There is no evidence of an error or injustice occurring during the court-martial process.  There is no evidence showing the applicant was not afforded all of his procedural due process rights at trial or during appellate review.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/JA recommends denying the application.  There was no evidence found or received to warrant an upgrade of the applicant’s discharge.  However, there is an error in the applicant’s service characterization on his DD 214.  As referenced in AFLOA/JAJM’s advisory, it would appear that applicant’s records were erroneously processed with a UOTHC service characterization and should be updated to a BCD characterization, since this was a result of his special court-martial conviction.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit F.

AFBCMR Mental Health Consultant recommends denying the application.  There is no evidence to warrant granting the requested relief.  The applicant contends his family issues caused him stress and contributed to his misconduct.  A review of his medical and military records found no treatment records, diagnosis, evaluation, or other corroborating statements from the applicant, his medical providers, or his superiors, that indicate he was experiencing or struggling with family problems.  Therefore, it is speculative that his family problems caused his misconduct, as there was no evidence to support his assertions.  The applicant further contended he never was offered or received a psychological evaluation while in service.  The Mental Health Consultant is unable to provide possible discernable explanations for his contention, as there may be multiple extenuating circumstances for reasons he was not offered an evaluation at the time.  There was also no available post-service documentation of any mental health symptoms, disorders or treatment to support applicant’s contention.  The applicant further alleged racial discrimination during his discharge processing, as he was never offered an opportunity for rehabilitation.  Given the severity of his misconduct of repeated AWOL, his discharge characterization is consistent with the Air Force’s discharge processing practice.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit G.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent copies of the Air Force evaluations to the applicant on 23 Aug 18 for comment (Exhibit H), but has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was not timely filed.

2.  The applicant exhausted 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.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of Air Force office of primary responsibilities and finds that a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The applicant be informed the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, and the application will only be reconsidered upon receipt of relevant evidence not already considered by the Board.

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-2016-02286 in Executive Session on 25 Oct 18:

, Panel Chair
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

All members voted not to correct the record.  The panel considered the following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2016-02286:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 25 Apr 16.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Letter, SAF/MRBC, w/atch, dated 22 Aug 16.
Exhibit D	Advisory opinion, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 14 Nov 16.
Exhibit E	Memorandum, AFPC/DP2STM, dated 2 Dec 16.
Exhibit F:	Advisory opinion, AFPC/JA, dated 8 Dec 16.
Exhibit G:	Advisory, AFBCMR Mental Health Consultant, dated 11 Jun 18.
Exhibit H:	 Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 23 Aug 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.