RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05100 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He did not get along with his first sergeant and was denied a transfer out of the squadron. The Board should consider it in the interest of justice to consider his request as the upgrade of his discharge is required for employment purposes. In support of his request, the applicant provides letters of support and a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 2 Jul 96, the applicant entered active duty. On 26 Feb 98, the applicant’s commander informed him that he was recommending he be discharged from the Air Force In Accordance With (IAW) AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, paragraph 5.50.2. The specific reasons for the recommendation include a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for disorderly conduct, LOR and placement on the control roster for accumulating more than 12 traffic violation points, an Article 15 for failure to pay his debts, Letters of Counseling (LOC) for dereliction in the performance of his duties and a LOR and Unfavorable Information File (UIF) for misuse of his government travel card. The applicant was scheduled for an appointment to consult with legal counsel. On 2 Mar 98, the staff judge advocate determined the discharge recommendation was legally sufficient. On 3 Mar 98, the discharge authority approved the discharge recommendation. On 4 Mar 98, he was discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions) with a narrative reason for separation of “Misconduct.” He served 1 year, 8 months and 2 days on active duty. Pursuant to the Board’s request, on 27 Jan 14, the Air Force Office of Special Investigation (OSI) confirmed a criminal history investigation does exist. On 31 Jul 14, the AFBCMR staff offered the applicant an opportunity to provide information pertaining to his activities since leaving the service (Exhibit C). In a letter dated 5 Aug 14, he states that he deployed as a contract employee in support of OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM (OEF) where he built wireless networks at 30 sites. He completed ground school and deployed under the U.S. Navy. Upon return from deployment, he worked for 20 months as a senior network engineer and provides letters of recommendation for his services. He is currently working as a senior telecom analyst. The arrest record on file was due to a bad check. He paid the bill and cleared his name. There was a warrant out of the county and he spent a couple nights in jail. He is 37 years old with a wife and three kids and didn’t know enough to protect himself. In support of his request, the applicant provides a personal statement, letters of support and a certificate of training. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 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 an error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission, to include his rebuttal response, 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 for us to conclude that the applicant’s post-service activities overcome the misconduct for which he was discharged. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis 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 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-2013-05100 in Executive Session 9 and 24 Sep 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 13 Aug 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records Exhibit C. AFBCMR Letter, dated 31 Jul 14, w/atch. Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 5 Aug 14, w/atchs. 1 2