RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 				DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-00750

 						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED: NO



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge 
be upgraded.

2.  His narrative reason for separation be changed.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The basis of his discharge was an isolated incident.  This 
isolated incident was the only reprimand he received during his 
enlistment.  He was never given a chance to make it right.  He 
was not briefed or provided any options as to what he could do 
to stay in the Air Force.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 1 Apr 93, the applicant commenced his enlistment in the 
Regular Air Force and was progressively promoted to the grade of 
senior airman (SrA), E-4.

On 4 Jun 97, the applicant’s commander initiated discharge 
action against him for the commission of a serious offense.  The 
reason for the discharge action was the applicant stole, forged 
and cashed a check belonging to a fellow service member, for 
which he received non-judicial punishment under Article 15 of 
the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  The applicant’s 
imposed punishment was a reduction in grade to airman basic 
(AB), E-1, with a new date of rank (DOR) of 23 May 97.  His 
commander recommended separation with a UOTHC discharge without 
probation and rehabilitation.

On 13 Jun 97, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant 
submitted an unconditional waiver of his right to an 
administrative discharge board hearing.  In the statement 
submitted with the unconditional waiver, the applicant requested 
that he be granted probation and rehabilitation, and if denied, 
he receive a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.   

On 30 Jun 97, the staff judge advocate (SJA) reviewed the case 
and found it legally sufficient and recommended the discharge 
authority accept the applicant’s unconditional waiver, and that 
he be separated with a UOTHC discharge without probation and 
rehabilitation rather than a general (under honorable 
conditions) discharge because of the nature of the offense.  The 
SJA states that a UOTHC discharge is appropriate when a 
significant negative aspect outweighs the positive aspects of 
the respondent’s duty performance.

On 30 Jun 97, the discharge authority concurred with the 
findings and recommendations and directed the applicant be 
furnished a UOTHC discharge without probation and 
rehabilitation.

On 10 Jul 97, he was furnished a UOTHC discharge with a 
narrative reason for separation as “misconduct,” and was 
credited with four years, three months, and ten days of total 
active service.

On 27 Feb 15, a request for post-service information and a 
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) background check was 
forwarded to the applicant (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 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, to 
include the narrative reason for separation, was consistent with 
the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was 
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 considered upgrading the 
discharge based on clemency; however, in the absence of any 
evidence for us to consider in determining whether or not the 
applicant’s activities since leaving the service are sufficient 
to overcome the misconduct for which he was discharged, we are 
not inclined 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 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-2015-00750 in Executive Session on 7 Oct 15, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2015-00750 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Jan 15, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Feb 15.