RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-05296

XXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL: NONE

HEARING: NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His mental state was the reason for his discharge. The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a former Air Force airman basic.

On 13 Mar 00, the applicant’s commander offered him Nonjudicial Punishment (NJP) proceedings under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for one violation of Article 91, Disrespectful Language toward a Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) and one violation of Article 134, Disorderly Conduct.

On 16 Mar 00, the applicant consulted counsel, waived his right to trial by court-martial and accepted the NJP proceedings. On 28 Mar 00, the commander determined he committed the alleged offenses and imposed punishment consisting of reduction to the grade of airman first class, suspended through 27 Sep 00, after which time it would be remitted without further actions and 15 days extra duty.

On or about 1 and 3 Apr 00, without authority, the applicant failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, in violation of one or more of the conditions of his suspension. Subsequently, on 19 Apr 00, his commander vacated the suspended punishment effecting the reduction to the grade of airman first class, with a new date of rank of 28 Mar 00.

On 7 Jan 02, the applicant’s commander offered him NJP proceedings under Article 15, UCMJ for one violation of Article 134, Drunk and Disorderly. On 10 Jan 02, the applicant consulted counsel, waived his right to trial by court-martial and accepted the NJP proceedings. On 14 Jan 02, the commander determined he committed the alleged offense and imposed punishment consisting of reduction to the grade of airman basic, suspended through 14 Jan 02.

On 26 Jun 02, the applicant was furnished a general (under honorable conditions) discharge, and separation code of HKA, which denotes “Pattern of Misconduct”, and a reentry code of 2B.    He

was credited with 10 years, 1 month and 27 days of active duty service.
On 10 Mar 16 and 12 May 16, the applicant was notified that AFI 36-2603, AFBCMR, paragraph
4.7.3 requires that if an applicant has not exhausted all available effective administrative remedies, the application will be denied by the Board on that basis. For more information, see the excerpt  of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibit E.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Psychiatric Advisor recommends denying the application, indicating there is insufficient evidence to warrant a change in the applicant’s discharge from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable.

The Psychiatric Advisor opines all of the applicant’s issues were related to his own personal life. While the applicant has made some major positive changes in the past year, his life history post- military was one of someone using alcohol and marijuana, and living on the streets. The complete advisory is at Exhibit E.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent a copy of the Air Force evaluation to the applicant on 26 Apr 18 for comment (Exhibit F), but has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.	The application was not timely filed.

2.	The applicant exhausted all available avenues of non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.	After reviewing all Exhibits, it is the Board’s opinion that the applicant is not the victim of an injustice. It appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the commander’s discretion. Nor was the discharge unduly harsh or disproportionate to the offenses committed. Therefore, the Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of BCMR Psychiatric Advisor and finds that a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions. While we note, SAF/MRBR indicates the applicant has failed to file an appeal through the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB); however, he was discharged more than 15 years ago; therefore, seeking administrative relief from the AFDRB is no longer an available option. In the interest of justice, the Board considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, given the evidence presented, the Board finds no basis to do so. Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The applicant be informed the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, and the application will only be reconsidered upon receipt of relevant evidence not already considered by

the Board.

CERTIFICATION:

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2015-05296 in Executive Session on 16 Aug 18:

Panel Chair
Panel Member 
Panel Member
All members voted not to correct the record. The panel considered the following: Exhibit A: Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 18 Dec 15.
Exhibit B: Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records. Exhibit C: Email, SAF/MRBC, dated 10 Mar 16.
Exhibit D: Email, SAF/MRBC, w/atchs, dated 12 May 16.
Exhibit E: Advisory opinion, Psychiatric Advisor, dated 15 Mar 18.
Exhibit F.  Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 26 Apr 18.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.