RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-00678 INDEX CODE: 113.04 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His current active duty service commitment (ADSC) date be removed or adjusted to 1 May 08. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His ADSC date change was the result of a training program he was not allowed to complete due to an allegation of misconduct. The allegation resulted in a reprimand, loss of his Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC), documentation added in his officer selection record (OSR), and a referral performance report. He accepted the Article 15, Record of Non-judicial Punishment, on the advice of his counsel and because he wanted to proceed with his training and job, without delay. Although he has received evidence that may exonerate him, rather than retract the punishment, and attempt reintegration to an AFSC wherein he could be successful, he is pending retraining for the year he has left on his ADSC. It would be best for him and the Air Force if the ADSC date was removed. He has had a successful track record within the Air Force and has been recognized for achievements such as Airman of the Year three times, he was commissioned, he commanded his Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps (AFROTC) cadet corps, he earned distinguished graduate commendation, and he was selected for a position with the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI). He was hand selected to work on numerous high-interest projects and broke records in counter-intelligence operations. In support of his request, the applicant provided statements in his own behalf, a letter from his Area Defense Counsel, e- mails with a log, a timeline of events, and character statements. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ _ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 8 Dec 06, the applicant was offered non-judicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). He was accused of engaging in an adulterous relationship with a female Air Force officer, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. He was also accused of conduct unbecoming of an officer and a gentleman by engaging in an unprofessional relationship with a female Air Force officer, a person subject to his direct supervision, by engaging in flirtatious behavior with her, by holding hands and kissing her, by displaying affection towards her in his office at the AFOSI Detachment, and by laying down with her in an inappropriate manner while hosting a party at his residence, in violation of Article 133, UCMJ. After consulting with counsel, he waived his right to a court- martial and accepted non-judicial punishment proceedings on 21 Dec 06. He provided statements in his own behalf in which he adamantly denied the allegations and elected not to request a personal hearing before the commander. After weighing all the evidence, the commander found he committed the offenses charged. On 10 Jan 07, the commander imposed punishment consisting of forfeiture of $2,400 pay per month for two months and a reprimand. The applicant appealed and submitted matters in writing. His appeal was denied. On 9 Jul 07, discharge action was initiated and on 2 Aug 07, the applicant submitted a conditional waiver of his rights associated with an administrative discharge board contingent upon the receipt of no less than an honorable discharge. The discharge authority rejected the conditional waiver on 31 Aug 07. On 12 Dec 07, the discharge authority terminated discharge proceedings against the applicant. The applicant signed an AF Form 63, Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) Acknowledgement Statement, on 1 Jun 06. ________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLOA/JAJM states there was no error or injustice in the Article 15 process and the applicant alleges none. JAJM defers to AFPC/DPS in regards to the applicant’s request for an adjusted ADSC. The complete AFLOA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPS recommends denial. DPS states there is no administrative basis to completely remove an ADSC or to adjust to less than a two (2) year commitment for non-completion of training. The applicant signed the AF Form 63, which states in Section II, “I acknowledge the ADSC(s) described in Section I and was given the opportunity to review and read AFI 36-2107. I hereby acknowledge and agree to the following: c. To accept and serve the ADSC(s) associated with withdrawal or elimination from education or training described in AFI 36-2107 and Title 10.” DPS states the applicant may request a waiver of his ADSC in conjunction with separation in accordance with AFI 36-3207, Separating Commissioned Officers, or as an exception to Air Force policy if he wishes to separate from the Air Force prior to completing his ADSC. The complete AFPC/DPS evaluation, with attachments is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 8 Aug 08 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). As of this date, this office has not received a response. ________________________________________________________________ _ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was timely filed. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 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 our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. ________________________________________________________________ _ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application. ________________________________________________________________ _ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC- 2008-00678 in Executive Session on 30 October 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: XXXXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair XXXXXXXXXXXX, Member XXXXXXXXXXXX, Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 15 Feb 08. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 27 Mar 08. Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFPC/DPS, w/atchs, undated. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Aug 08. 2 3 4 5