RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01163 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) characterization of discharge be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He is requesting his discharge be upgraded due to an early marriage and emotional immaturity. He has had time to grow. The applicant did not provide any documents in support of his request. The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 19 July 1985. On 7 June 1988, the applicant was notified by his commander that he was recommending him for discharge from the Air Force under the authority of Air Force Regulation (AFR) 39-10 Administrative Separation of Airmen paragraph 5-46, because of minor disciplinary infractions substantiated by the applicant’s constant involvement in behavior that was inconsistent with acceptable Air Force standards as evidenced by nonjudicial and administrative actions he received as follows: a. Article 15 with 7 days extra duty and suspended reduction in rank to the grade of Airman on 7 April 1987 for writing five checks totaling $669.44 which were returned for insufficient funds. b. Article 15 with reduction in rank from Airman First Class (E-3) to Airman (E-2), on 13 April 1988 for having a female guest in his dorm room after visiting hours, falsifying BOQ recertification documents and failing to have sufficient funds to pay temporary duty (TDY) billeting expenses. c. Misconduct leading to administrative actions included a letter of reprimand, seven letters of counseling and four memos for record for duty related infractions as well as incidences of financial irresponsibility, a withdrawal of authority to bear firearms, and a non-recommendation for reenlistment. On 7 June 1988, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge and was advised of his right to consult counsel and submit statements for consideration. He consulted counsel but chose not to submit a statement on his behalf. 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 7 July 1988 and was credited with 2 years, 11 months, and 19 days of active duty service. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provided a copy of an Investigative Report which is at Exhibit C. A copy of the FBI Investigative Report was forwarded to the applicant on 9 August 2012, along with a request for post- service documentation for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). ________________________________________________________________ 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. 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, there was no evidence submitted to compel us to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis. 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 this application BC-2012-01163 in Executive Session on 16 October 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149 dated 6 March 2012. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. FBI Report Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR dated 9 August 2012. Panel Chair