RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01588 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 1. He served his country honorably during his enlistment. During the last two years of his service, he was prejudiced by his first sergeant (1st Sgt). On several occasions, the 1st Sgt showed his dislike for his friendship with the squadron commander. After the squadron commander was reassigned, he transferred to the bomber and tanker alert to avoid any future problems but still had the same 1st Sgt. 2. He made plans to get married; had his leave approved and a few days before it was to start, it was canceled by Sergeant T. He waited a short time and reapplied for leave, had it approved, only to have the 1st Sgt, cancel it again. This happened one more time. 3. He had 14 days of accrued leave but did not realize there was a problem until 9 days into it. He returned on day 10 and was taken into custody for being absent without leave (AWOL). In support of his request the applicant provides a character reference letter. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 27 Aug 68, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force. On 17 Dec 69, the applicant received a civilian traffic ticket for improper use of registration plates. On 13 Jan 70, the applicant received an Article 15 for disobeying a lawful order, in violation of Article 92, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). His punishment consisted of a suspended reduction to the grade of airman, restriction to the limits of K.I. Sawyer Air Force Base (AFB) and extra duty for seven consecutive days. The portion of punishment which extended to reduction to the grade of airman was suspended until 5 Jun 70, at which time it was to be remitted without further action unless sooner vacated. On 9 May 70, the applicant received a letter of indebtedness from Firestone Tire Sales and Service. On 18 Jun 70, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for disobeying orders, being in an un-pressed uniform during an inspection, and maintaining a dirty room. On 22 Oct 70, the applicant received a LOR for failure to pay just debts and making a false statement. On 7 Dec 70, the applicant received a DD Form 1408, Armed Forces Traffic Ticket for parking in a prohibited area. On 11 Jan 71, the applicant received a letter of indebtedness from Busch’s Jewelry Company. On 14 Jan 71, the applicant received a letter of indebtedness from Hollywood Diamond Exchange. On 22 Feb 71, the applicant received a DD Form 1408, Armed Forces Traffic Ticket for parking in a prohibited area. On 22 Feb 71, the applicant received an Article 15 for being AWOL, in violation of Article 86, UCMJ. His punishment consisted of a suspended reduction to the grade of airman and confinement to the Correctional Facility at K. I. Sawyer AFB. The portion of punishment which extended to reduction to the grade of airman was suspended until 19 Aug 71, at which time it was to be remitted without further action unless sooner vacated. On 23 Mar 71, the applicant received a LOR for failure to repair. On 8 Apr 71, the applicant received a referral airman performance report (APR) for the period 1 Oct 70 through 29 Mar 71. On 19 Apr 71, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFM 39-12, Separation for Unsuitability, Unfitness, Misconduct, Resignation, or Request for Discharge for the Good of the Service and Procedures for the Rehabilitation Program, Chapter 2, Section A, paragraph 2-4b. The specific reason for the proposed action was based on competent medical authorities diagnosing him with having an “immature personality with passive-aggressive components.” The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge. On 22 Apr 71, the applicant was interviewed by an evaluation officer, advised of his right to rebuttal and to make a statement on his own behalf. The applicant waived his right to rebuttal and to submit a statement on his own behalf. On 23 Apr 71, the evaluation officer recommended the applicant be discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge without probation and rehabilitation. On 28 Apr 71, the Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) concluded the case file was legally sufficient to support the separation and the type of discharge recommended. The discharge authority approved the applicant’s discharge under the provisions of AFM 39-12. On 30 Apr 71, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge in the grade of airman first class. He served 2 years, 7 months and 24 days of total active service. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) Clarksburg, WV, states they were unable to identify an arrest record on the basis of the information furnished (Exhibit C). _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we find no evidence to indicate that his discharge from the Air Force was inappropriate, or that the actions taken to affect his discharge and the characterization of his service were improper, contrary to the provisions of the governing regulations in effect at the time, or based on factors other than his own behavior and inability to comply with standards. In addition, we find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which to recommend granting the relief sought. ________________________________________________________________ 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-01588 in Executive Session on 15 Nov 11, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Apr 11. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. FBI Investigation, dated 12 Oct 11.