RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-03367

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded 
to Honorable.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

It has been 31 years since his discharge.  His supervisor set 
him up for failure in part because he was at the center of an 
incident between his supervisor and the assistant fire chief.  
He has no evidence to substantiate his position; however, the 
assistant fire chief was aware of the situation.  He planned to 
stay in the Air Force and, to this day, he encourages others to 
pursue this as a career option.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A. 


STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

The applicant’s military personnel records indicate he enlisted 
in the Regular Air Force on 26 Jun 80.

On 1 Feb 83, the applicant’s commander notified him of his 
intent to recommend his discharge for Misconduct-Pattern of 
Minor Disciplinary Infractions under the provisions of AFR 39-
10, Administrative Separation of Airmen.  The reasons for the 
action included four failures to go, being involved with another 
military member’s wife, and poor job performance.  For these 
infractions, the applicant received non-judicial punishment 
under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 
an Unfavorable Information File (UIF), three letters of 
counseling, and one letter of reprimand. 

On 3 Feb 83, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant 
acknowledged receipt of the action and waived his right to 
submit a statement on his behalf.

On 4 Feb 83, the case was found to be legally sufficient and the 
discharge authority approved the commander’s recommendation, 
directing the applicant’s administrative discharge without 
probation and rehabilitation.

On 18 Feb 83, the applicant was furnished an General (Under 
Honorable Conditions) discharge for Misconduct-Pattern of Minor 
Disciplinary Infractions and was credited with 2 years, 
7 months, and 23 days of total active service.

A request for post-service information was forwarded to the 
applicant on 26 Mar 14 for review and comment within 30 days.  
In response, the applicant provides an expanded statement 
describing his experiences subsequent to his discharge.  He is a 
husband and father of eight years.  Additionally, he was an 
excellent employee during each of his employment stents as 
evidenced by his rapid promotion to managerial positions at most 
of his places of employment.  Unfortunately, he is now disabled 
and is no longer able to work.  He reiterates that if his 
request is granted, his discharge will accurately reflect his 
service performance and continued support of the Air Force, 
military, and its goals and mission.  In support of his 
response, he provides copies of three character references and 
an FBI arrest record report (Exhibits D and 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 an 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 on the basis of 
clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient for us to recommend granting the relief sought on 
that basis at this time.  Therefore, in view of the above, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

4.  The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel 
will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2013-03367 in Executive Session on 31 Jul 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 11 Nov 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 26 Mar 14.
Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atchs.
Exhibit E.  FBI Report.
1 2