RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-02213 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 8 Apr 13 disenrollment from the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA), all documents associated therewith, to include his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be removed from his military personnel records, and he be graduated and commissioned retroactively with his class of 2013. Alternatively, he be reinstated to the USAFA for such time as may be necessary to complete all requirements for graduation and commissioning. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: In a four-page personal statement, the applicant, through counsel, contends that he was unfairly and unjustly denied a diploma and a commission. The Office of Special Investigation (OSI) Agent, who knew what he had done as a Confidential Informant (CI), and how his OSI activities resulted in his demerits, was ordered not to testify. The OSI leadership used him to get close to sexual abusers and drug traffickers, securing three general courts-martial convictions and favorable resolutions in dozens of other cases, and then refused to honor their promise to explain to his chain of command what he had done, and ultimately misled USAFA authorities resulting in his disenrollment. He deserves a fair chance to prove himself and acknowledgement that his disenrollment was fatally tainted by the twisted picture that USAFA authorities were fed in his case. He was disenrolled literally a few weeks shy of graduation, thereby losing the final academic credits required. He has pledged that he will take any assignment to any squadron, and do whatever is asked of him militarily, athletically, and academically. He wants only a fair chance to earn the prize that he values above all others—to serve. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant attended the USAFA Preparatory School from 16 Jul 08 to 24 Jun 09. On 25 Jun 09, the applicant entered Basic Cadet Training (BCT) at the USAFA, and after BCT, became a 4th Class cadet in the class of 2013. According to documents provided by USAFA/CWVVD, the following is a chronological list of the applicant’s discipline history and administrative actions during the matter in question: From 27 Jan 10 through 15 Oct 10, the applicant accumulated 90 demerit points, 4 months restriction, 61 confinements for the following: missed appointment, unexcused absence, simulating a BCT hazing event (faking a basic cadet going AWOL), and violating Article 92 of the UCMJ (failure to obey a lawful order or regulation). On or about 15 Oct 10, the applicant was interviewed by OSI regarding a Divide 40 Party in Woodland Park, CO, which involved under aged drinking, and shortly thereafter, agreed to becoming a “confidential informant” for the OSI. From Mar 11 through Nov 11, the applicant received 309 demerits, 176 confinements, 99 tours, 6 months’ restriction for the following multiple offenses: drinking in the dormitories, being behind closed doors with the opposite sex and going Over the Fence (OTF} habitually, smoking hookah in the dorms with freshman, missed formation, not completing required training. On 19 Jan 12, the Squadron Commander Review Board (SCRB) convened to review the applicant’s performance, and recommended a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for the multiple offenses committed between Mar 11 through Nov 11. Additionally, the SCRB recommended he be placed on 6 months’ Conduct/Aptitude Probation. On 23 Jan 12, the Group Command Review Board (GCRB) convened to review the applicant’s performance. The GCRB concurred with the SCRB recommendations, and that the applicant’s performance be reviewed by the Military Review Committee (MRC). On 30 Jan 12, the applicant’s Squadron Air Officer Commanding (AOC) placed the applicant on probation and recommended his disenrollment. The disenrollment recommendation was not acted upon due to the applicant’s pending testimony that was necessary in the prosecution of another USAFA Cadet. On 31 Jan 12, a LOR was rendered to the applicant for multiple disciplinary events occurring Mar 11 through Nov 11. On 5 Mar 12, the Vice Commandant of Cadets (USAFA/CWV) concurred with the disenrollment recommendation and recommended the case be reviewed by the Hearing Officer stating, “MRC is not the right forum to discuss the more sensitive information.” On 16 Mar 12, the Commandant of Cadets (USAFA/CW) decided to take the applicant’s case to MRC, but delay until the applicant testified at another USAFA Cadet’s Courts Martial. The USAFA/CW signed the Hearing Officer Staff Summary Sheet; “Electing to defer a decision on the applicant’s case pending completion of the on-going criminal investigation.” On 18 Jun 12, the applicant testified as a witness in another USAFA Cadet’s Courts Martial. On 26 Jun 12, the applicant’s AOC completed USAFA Form 0-299, AOC Evaluation of Cadet, for the MRC stating that, the applicant has amassed over 450 demerits and recommended he be disenrolled. He stated that the applicant had previously been on Conduct and Aptitude Probation but seemed to not have learned or changed his attitude from the experience. With his history of disregarding the rules of the USAFA and the multiple opportunities he had to change his behavior, the AOC believed he did not have the aptitude to be a commissioned officer. On 5 Jul 12, the 4th Group Commander concurred with the disenrollment recommendation by signing USAFA Form 0-299. On 20 Jul 12, the USAFA/CWV signed the disenrollment recommendation sending case to MRC. On 29 Aug 12, the MRC convened and by a 5-0 vote, recommended to the USAFA/CW that the applicant be disenrolled. On 18 Sep 12, the corrected MRC transcript was received. However, due to a Chief Cadet Wing Discipline (USAFA/CWVV-D) family matter (sickness/death of father), and an external drive crash containing the transcript and executive summary of the MRC findings, the files and records pertaining to the applicant’s case were not completed until Jan 13. On 15/16 Jan 13, the “Hard” Academic Review Committee (ARC) reviewed the applicant’s case and recommended he be retained. On 25 Feb 13, USAFA/JACD completed a review of the MRC case for legal sufficiency and forwarded to the USAFA/CW. On 7 Mar 13, USAFA/CW met with the applicant. On 18 Mar 13, USAFA/CW concurred with the disenrollment recommendation from MRC and met with USAFA/CC (Superintendent) to discuss the case. On 22 Apr 13, USAFA/CC reviewed the misconduct case of the applicant, and the recommendation of USAFA/CW and directed the applicant be disenrolled, not recommended for future commissioning, given an honorable discharge, and a recommendation to SECAF that his Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) be waived. On 29 May 13, the applicant was involuntarily disenrolled by the USAFA Superintendent after a recommendation by the Military Review Committee on 29 Aug 12, and concurrence by the Commandant of Cadets on 18 Mar 13. On 10 Sep 13, the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAF/PC) considered the applicant’s case. The council found no basis to question the underlying disenrollment, enlisted service or an educational delay to pursue AFROTC inappropriate. They recommended waiver of recoupment and release. On 27 Sep 13, the applicant was furnished an honorable discharge. The Secretary of the Air Force waived his ADSC, and further directed he not be ordered to reimburse the United States Government for the cost of advanced education incurred by attendance at the USAFA in accordance with Section 2005 of Title 10 and Section 303a(e) of Title 37, United States Code. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: USAFA/CWVVD recommends denial of the requested relief indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. Their evaluation revealed the applicant was afforded due process, to include the right to consult with counsel, present evidence, and be present when witnesses were testifying at his Military Review Committee (MRC). On 29 Aug 12, the MRC reviewed the entire cadet career of the applicant to include academics, physical fitness, and his aptitude for commissioned service. At the time of the applicant’s review by the MRC he had accumulated 458 career demerits and had been on eleven periods of Academic Probation: fall ’09 (mid), summer ’10 (end), fall ’10 (end), spring ’10 (mid/end), summer ’11 (end), fall ’11 (mid/end), spring ’11 (mid/end) and summer ’12 (end). By a 5-0 vote, they recommended to the USAFA/CW that the applicant be disenrolled for misconduct. The MRC opined that the applicant entered the Air Force Academy with all the tools to be successful academically, militarily and athletically--the expected success did not materialize. He had significant academic issues and his military performance was dismal at best. He failed to live up to the definition of Aptitude for Commissioned Service, as defined in USAFI 36-3523, Review and Disposition of Deficient Cadets. They concluded that the applicant either refused or was incapable of living up to the expectation established for all cadets at the USAFA. While it is not known if the testimony of the OSI Agent familiar with the applicant’s CI role would have been enough to change the MRC’s 5-0 vote to recommend disenrollment, the USAFA did acknowledge the applicant’s role with the OSI, and that he was important to investigations and provided witness testimony in the prosecution of a cadet for sexual assault of another cadet. The USAFA/CC, USAFA/CW, and SAF/PC recommended that based on his substantiated assistance with the OSI, to waive his ADSC, and waive his obligation to monetarily reimburse the government for the cost of his USAFA education. A complete copy of the USAFA/CWVVD evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant’s counsel refutes virtually every point made by the OPR and argues that they overlooked that the majority of the demerits of the applicant were related to his role as a confidential informant (CI) for the OSI, and that he exhibited moral and physical courage to take serial sexual predators and cadet drug dealers out of the Cadet Wing. In that respect, counsel describes incidents resulting in demerits, stating that the applicant conceded there was misconduct pre-dating his role as a CI, but contends that cumulatively those demerits were insufficient to trigger a MRC, much less disenrollment. In closing, counsel argues that the Air Force Evaluation does not address the alleged errors and injustices committed by the OSI, and that the applicant did not get his due process when the OSI Agent familiar with his role as a CI was ordered not to testify before the MRC. In support of this response, the applicant provided responses to several of the USAFA staff claims, and included 26 Exhibits of various documents associated with the case. A complete copy of the response to the Air Force Evaluation is at Exhibit E. THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2.  The application was timely filed. 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, to include his counsel’s response to the Air Force Evaluation; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. While the applicant and counsel contend that he was unfairly and unjustly denied a diploma and a commission for what he had done as a Confidential Informant (CI), and the OSI ultimately misled USAFA authorities resulting in his disenrollment, the Board was persuaded the applicant’s display of unacceptable conduct not associated with his CI activities, demonstrated he did not have the aptitude for commissioned service and leadership required for graduation from the USAFA, in accordance with DoD and USAFA guidance. Evidence provided substantiates his assistance with the OSI was known by Air Force leadership resulting in a recommendation for his active duty service commitment (ADSC) to be waived, and the Secretary of the Air Force directing that he not be ordered to reimburse the United States Government for the cost of his advanced education incurred by attendance at the USAFA in accordance with Section 2005 of Title 10 and Section 303a (e) of Title 37, United States Code. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. 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-2015-02213 in Executive Session on 24 Mar 16 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-02213 was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 28 Apr 15, w/atchs. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.  Memorandum, USAFA/CWVVD, dated 13 Jul 15,   w/atchs. Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Oct 15. Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant’s Counsel, dated, 12 Nov 15,   w/atchs.