RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2017-00030

	COUNSEL: NONE

	HEARING: NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His discharge was unjust.  He was undergoing a difficult time in his personal life and believes if he had been provided counseling he would have been able to save his military career.  There was no corrective action plan set in place for him, only discipline and personal judgement by others.  

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a former Air Force senior airman.  

On 2 Aug 95, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend that he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.50.2 for conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline.  The reasons for the action were as follows:

	a. On 30 Jan 95, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for receiving a ticket for an expired vehicle registration.

	b. On 13 Mar 95, the applicant received an LOR for substandard duty performance and supervision.

	c. On 13 Mar 95, the applicant received an LOR for making derogatory statements about his supervisor and first sergeant to his subordinates.

	d. On 21 Apr 95, the applicant received an LOR and an Unfavorable Information File (UIF) entry for being derelict in the performance of his duties.

	e. The applicant received a UIF entry on 18 May 95 and an Article 15 on 31 May 95 for a delinquent account and failing to pay outstanding balance for his government credit card.

	f. On 12 Jul 95, the applicant received an Article 15 for making cash withdrawals for other than government business with his government credit card.

On 31 Aug 95, the applicant received a general discharge. 

On 2 Jul 18, a request for post-service information, including a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) background check, was forwarded to the applicant (Exhibit C), but no response has been received.

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the delay.

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

3.  After thoroughly 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.  In the interest of justice, the Board considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, in the absence of post-service information, 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-2017-00030 in Executive Session on 9 Aug 18:

All members voted not to correct the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Forms 149, w/atchs, dated 28 Dec 16.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Letter, SAF/MRBC, w/atchs, dated 2 Jul 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.