RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02662 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was young and made immature decisions which he regrets. He makes no excuses for what he did, but can proudly say that he has gone on to live a nice life. He and his wife have been married for 25 years and raised two children together. The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 2 Jun 87, the applicant entered active duty in the Regular Air Force. On 28 Jan 93, the applicant was notified by his squadron commander that he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for misconduct-minor disciplinary infractions. The reasons for the proposed action were: 1) On 30 Jun 92, he made and uttered a bad check in the amount of $98.35; 2) On 17 Aug 92, he was issued a Notification of Indebtedness letter for dishonored checks in the amount of $177.38; 3) On 11 Sep 92, 2 Oct 92 and 5 Oct 92, he was involved in assaults with his wife. On 6 Oct 92, he was directed by his squadron commander to attend mandatory Alternative to Violence classes; and 4) On 22 Jan 93, he received an Article 15 for being disorderly and for unlawfully striking his wife repeatedly on the back of her head and her back with his fists. On 3 Feb 93, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge, consulted with legal counsel, and waived his right to submit statements in his own behalf. The base legal office reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support separation. The discharge authority approved the separation and directed a general (under honorable conditions) discharge without probation and rehabilitation. On 16 Feb 93, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen, for Misconduct-Pattern of Minor Disciplinary Infractions, and received a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. He served on active duty for a period of 5 years, 8 months and 15 days. Pursuant to the request of the Board on 26 Jul 12, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, indicated on 30 Jul 12, that, on the basis of the data furnished, they were unable to locate an arrest record. On 17 Dec 12, a request for information pertaining to his post- service activities was forwarded to the applicant for response within 30 days (Exhibit C). As of this date, no response has been received by this office. _________________________________________________________________ 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. We conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances. The only other basis upon which to consider upgrade of his discharge would be clemency. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, he provides no evidence concerning his post-service accomplishments to warrant consideration on this 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 Docket Number BC-2012-02662 in Executive Session on 14 Feb 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Jun 12, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 17 Dec 12, w/atch.