RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2016-04904

	COUNSEL: 

	HEARING: NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

After completing his training, he did not feel that the military was a good fit for him and he asked his commander for an early discharge.  His commander seemed to agree with his request so he is surprised that his narrative reason for separation is misconduct.  He is trying to take advantage of education benefits that he paid into while he was in the military, but his discharge prevents him from doing so.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered the Regular Air Force on 17 November 1999.

On 7 February 2001, his commander notified him that he was recommending he be discharged under the provisions of AFPD 36-32, Military Retirements and Separations, and AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, for minor disciplinary infractions as evidenced by one nonjudicial punishment action under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice; six letters of reprimand; the establishment of an unfavorable information file; and three verbal counselings.  The commander recommended the applicant’s discharge be characterized as general.  On 7 February 2001, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification and on 8 February 2001, he indicated that he consulted with counsel and waived his right to submit statements on his behalf.

On 12 February 2001, the discharge authority directed the applicant be discharged and on 14 February 2001, the applicant received a discharge under honorable conditions (general).  His narrative reason for discharge is “Misconduct,” and he has credited with 1 year, 2 months and 28 days of active service.

On 20 September 2017, the Board sent the applicant a request for post-service information for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C), but has not received a response.

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

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 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, given the evidence presented, the Board finds no basis to do so.  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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2016-04904 in Executive Session on 1 May 2018:

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

Exhibit A: Application, DD Form 149, dated 29 November 2016.
Exhibit B: Documentary evidence, including excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C: Post Service Clemency Letter, w/atch, dated 20 September 2017.

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