RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2016-03283

XXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  NONE
	
	HEARING:  YES

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to and his grade be restored to staff sergeant.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His discharge was the result of an Article 15 for shoplifting.  Though his wife at the time stated she did the actual shoplifting, he was reduced in grade and discharged.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a former Air Force airman first class. 

On 12 Jul 79, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of Air Force Manual 39-12, Chapter 2, Section A, paragraph 2-4c.  The reasons for the action were as follows:

a.	On 30 Jan 79, the applicant was issued non-judicial punishment under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for derelict in the performance of his duties, in violation of Article 92, UCMJ.  The applicant was reduced to the grade of sergeant and ordered to forfeit $316.00 per month for two months.  The reduction to the grade of sergeant and forfeitures in excess of $100.00 per month for two months was  suspended until 1 Jul 79.

b.	On 28 Jun 79, the applicant was cited by Great Falls Police Department for shoplifting shoes valued at $31.50 from K-Mart.  The applicant appeared in civil court and was fined $50.00.

c.	On 29 Jun 79, the applicant’s suspension of the Article 15 punishment, dated 30 Jan 79, was vacated due to failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, on 16 Jun 79, in violation of Article 86, UCMJ.  The applicant’s date of rank to the grade of sergeant was 2 Feb 79.

d.	On 29 Jun 79, the applicant was issued non-judicial punishment under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for failure to go, in violation of Article 86, UCMJ.  The applicant was reduced to the grade of airman first class, with a new date of rank of 29 Jun 79.

e.	On 27 Jul 79, the applicant was notified of his permanent decertification from the Personnel Reliability Program.

On 31 Jul 79, the discharge action was found legally sufficient, and the discharge authority approved the recommendation.

On 10 Aug 79, the applicant received a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. 

On 16 Aug 16, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for comment (Exhibit C).  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

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

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFLOA/JAJM recommends denying the application.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit D.
AFPC/JA recommends denying the application.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit E.
AFPC/DP2SPP recommends denying the application.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit F.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent copies of the Air Force evaluations to the applicant on 11 May 18 for comment (Exhibit G), but has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the delay.

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 injustice.  There was no error or injustice that tends to undermine the Non-judicial Punishment and vacation actions the applicant received.  Additionally, it appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the commander’s discretion.  The discharge was not unduly harsh or disproportionate to the offenses committed.  In the interest of justice, the Board considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, given the evidence presented, the Board finds no basis to do so.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

4.  The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not been 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 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.

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-2016-03283 in Executive Session on 17 Jul 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, dated 8 Aug 16.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Clemency Letter, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 16 Aug 16.
Exhibit D:	Advisory opinion, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 10 Jul 17.
Exhibit E:	Advisory opinion, AFPC/JA, dated 25 Aug 17.
Exhibit F:	Advisory opinion, AFPC/DP2SPP, dated 18 Sep 17.
Exhibit G:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 11 May 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.