RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04348 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He feels he should have received counseling and rehabilitation for his infractions as is standard practice in the Air Force now. With a change in characterization, he would qualify for these services through the Department of Veteran Affairs (DVA). In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement; and, copies of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty; and his commander’s letter directing he be administratively discharged. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who served on active duty from 23 April 1982 to 17 June 1984. On 3 May 1984, the applicant, while serving in the grade of airman first class (E-3), was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend him for a general (under honorable conditions) discharge for a pattern of misconduct. The specific reasons for the discharge were his receipt of a letter of counseling for failure to report for charge of quarters duty, a letter of reprimand for failing to properly service a government vehicle with a subsequent Unfavorable Information File entry, a civil court conviction for driving while intoxicated, six dishonored check notifications, and one dishonorable failure to pay a just debt owed. After acknowledging receipt of his commander’s intent, the applicant consulted counsel and waived his right to submit statements in his own behalf. On 10 May 1984, the Staff Judge Advocate found the case to be legally sufficient. On 25 May 1984, the discharge authority approved the recommended discharge and directed the applicant be discharged without the offer of probation and rehabilitation. On 7 June 1984, the applicant was discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge under the provisions of Air Force Regulation 39-10, paragraphs 5-47b and d. His narrative reason for discharge was “Misconduct – Pattern of Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline.” The applicant served 2 years, 1 month, and 15 days on active duty. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Clarksburg, WV, provided a copy of an Investigation Report (Exhibit C). On 7 March 2012, the applicant was given an opportunity to submit comments about his post service activities and in response to the FBI Report (Exhibit D). The applicant responded with a personal statement, several character references, and course certificates. He indicates his misconduct while in the military was due to having a drinking problem. He has been sober for the past 18 years and has completed numerous self-improvement courses in hopes to be a productive citizen when he gets out of prison in 2016. The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ 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. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we find no evidence of an error or injustice that occurred in the discharge processing. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the commander's discretionary authority. The applicant has provided no evidence which would lead us to believe the characterization of the service was contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation, unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses committed. In the interest of justice we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to compel us to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis. Moreover, we note the applicant has had several arrests since his discharge and is currently incarcerated based on a conviction for battery with intent to commit sexual assault and three counts of sexual assault. 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-2011-04348 in Executive Session on 7 June 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-04348: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 Oct 11, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. FBI Report. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 7 Mar 12, w/atch. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, not dated, w/atchs.