RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2016-04810

XXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL: NONE

	HEARING: NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His general (under honorable conditions) discharge in 1993 was due in part to a toxic marriage, and he feels the Board should change his character of service for this period of service due to his continued service in and retirement from the Air National Guard.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered the Regular Air Force on 16 September 1988.

On 22 October 1993, the separation authority discharged the applicant for unsatisfactory performance, as documented in two letters of counseling, two letters of reprimand, and one non-judicial punishment action under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.  The applicant’s grade on separation was airman first class (E-3), and he received a general (under honorable conditions) service characterization.

On 7 February 1994, the applicant applied to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB), requesting the AFDRB upgrade his service to honorable.  The AFDRB concluded that a change in the type or nature of the discharge was not warranted and so denied his application.

According to DD Form 4, Enlistment/Reenlistment Document Armed Force of the United States, the applicant enlisted in the Air National Guard on 7 August 1999.

According to Special Reserve Order EK-3872 dated 6 May 2013, the applicant was honorably discharged from the Air National Guard in the grade of master sergeant (E-7) and transferred to the Air Force Reserve retired list effective 28 October 2013.  He will be eligible for retired pay at age 60.

On 4 October 2017, the Board sent the applicant a request for post-service information, including a standard criminal history report from the FBI (Exhibit C), but has received no response.

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibit D.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DP2STM recommends denying the application.  The commander provided sufficient documentation to warrant the discharge for unsatisfactory performance, and the applicant received due process.  Based on the review of the applicant’s request and the master personnel record, there is no error or injustice with the discharge processing.  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 20 June 2018 for comment (Exhibit E), 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.  It appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the commander’s discretion.  Nor was the discharge unduly harsh or disproportionate to the offenses committed.  In the interest of justice, the Board considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, in the absence of the requested post-service information and FBI report, the Board finds no basis to do so.  If the applicant were to re-apply with the requested information and report, the Board would be able to re-consider this recommendation.  However, given the state of the evidence, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records at this time.

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-2016-04810 in Executive Session on 30 August 2018:

, Panel Chair
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

All members voted against correcting the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 30 October 2016.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Post Service Clemency Letter, w/atch, dated 4 October 2017.
Exhibit D:	Advisory opinion, AFPC/DP2STM, dated 6 June 2018.
Exhibit E:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 20 June 2018.

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