RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02760 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He served in the US Air Force for seventeen months and did not use sound judgment on two occasions and fell guilty to underage drinking. The incidences occurred when he was young and he has learned his lesson. He apologizes for his inappropriate actions and behavior and would greatly appreciate reconsideration of his case. He is proudly serving as a supply specialist in the Army National Guard and has attained the rank of E-4. To date he has been a stellar performer, accomplished mandatory requirements and continues to better himself personally and professionally. His future goal is to return to active duty Air Force and pursue his career commitment and academic goals. He believes he would be a valuable asset to the Air Force. In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States with attachments. The applicant’s complete submission with attachments is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 10 February 2004. On 7 September 2005, the applicant was notified by his commander that he was recommending him for discharge from the Air Force based upon a Pattern of Misconduct, Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline under the provisions of AFPD 36-32, Military Retirements and Separations, and AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, Chapter 5, section H, paragraph 5.52. The specific reasons for this action were dereliction in the performance of duties by failing to refrain from consuming alcoholic beverages while under the legal drinking age of 21 and twice violating a lawful general order by wrongfully drinking alcohol while under the age of 21. As a result of these incidences the applicant received two Article 15s and one Letter of Reprimand. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge and was advised of his right to consult counsel and submit statements on his behalf: he waived his right to consult counsel and submit a written statement for consideration. Subsequent to the file being found legally sufficient, the discharge authority approved the separation and directed the applicant be discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service without probation and rehabilitation. The applicant was released from active duty on 27 September 2005 and was credited with 1 year, 7 months and 18 days of active duty service. The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) reviewed the applicant’s request for an upgrade to his discharge on 26 August 2010 and concluded no change in the discharge was warranted. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application extracted from the applicant’s military personnel records are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate Air Force office of primary responsibility (Exhibit C). Accordingly there is no need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. DPSOS states the applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. The applicant further contends that he should not be penalized indefinitely for a mistake made while he was young. Even though the applicant was 20 years of age when his discharge took place there is no evidence he was immature or did not know right from wrong. Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline is conduct of a nature that tends to disrupt order, discipline, or morale within the military community. This category of misconduct usually involves causing dissent, disruption, and degradation of mission effectiveness. It also includes conduct of a nature that tends to bring discredit on the Air Force in the view of the civilian community. The applicant was discharged under AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.52, Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline, for which the least favorable service characterization authorized is under other than honorable conditions. The applicant’s commander recommended and the discharge authority approved a service characterization of under honorable conditions (general) discharge which was authorized and within the discretion of the discharge authority. AFI 36-3208, paragraph 1.8.2 states that an Under Honorable Conditions (General) discharge is warranted when the applicant’s service has been honest and faithful; however, significant negative aspects of the applicant’s conduct or performance of duty outweigh the positive aspects of the applicant’s military record. The applicant did not provide any evidence of an error or injustice to warrant the requested change to his discharge characterization. Based on the documentation on file in his master personnel records, the discharge, to include the characterization of service, was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge manual and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. The complete AFPC/DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 4 November 2011 for review and comment within 30 days. 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 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 an error or an injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its 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 basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. ________________________________________________________________ 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 this application BC-2011-02760 in Executive Session on 27 March 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149 dated 21 July 2011, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 13 October 2011. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 November 2011. Panel Chair