RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02612 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His numerical rating in Section IV of DD Form 785, Record of Disenrollment from Officer Candidate – Type Training, be changed from “5” (Definitely Not Recommended) to “3” (Should Not Be Considered Without Weighing the Needs of the Service Against the Reasons for Disenrollment). _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He has matured since leaving the Air Force Academy. He has experienced numerous leadership roles and now believes he has what it takes to become an Air Force officer. Although it took him making mistakes, he now realizes the values and morals that true Air Force Academy cadets develop and will continue with his motivation in all future endeavors. He plans to use the lessons and experiences he learned to one day become not only an officer of character, but also a person with true integrity, selflessness, and perseverance to do the best that he can. If the rating is changed from “5” to a “3”, he knows he would gain more exposure to leadership in the military that will help him to be molded into an officer that he knows he can be. In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 785. His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Information provided by HQ USAFA/JA shows that the applicant committed numerous cadet infractions, to include being involved in two significant alcohol incidents. On 24 Aug 10, the Commandant of Cadets directed that the applicant’s pattern of misconduct be reviewed by a Hearing Officer. The Hearing Officer found by a preponderance of evidence that he (1) failed to exercise leadership responsibilities in the presence of underage drinkers, (2) consumed alcohol while under the legal age for consumption, (3) violated a no contact order, (4) was smoking on the terrazzo at the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA), (5) left the cadet area without authorization, and (6) lied about his whereabouts. The applicant’s commander recommended he be disenrolled from the Academy, discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge, and assigned a “5” on his DD Form 785. Additional relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force. Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ USAFA/JA recommends denial. JA states the applicant seems to believe that a simple change of a numerical rating on his DD Form 785 will automatically make him eligible to return to the Academy or enter into another commissioning program. However, JA sees his general characterization discharge as the bigger hurdle to overcome. While JA does not doubt the applicant has matured, they stand by the numerical rating as it depicts an accurate picture of the applicant’s time in the military. The rating of “5” is a means to differentiate the applicant’s case from the honor code violation disenrollment and/or the physical fitness/academic deficient cases. Specifically, where former cadets do not engage in illegal behavior or significant cadet level misconduct yet still end up receiving a rating of “3” on their DD Form 785 because of their inability to maintain minimum standards. The HQ USAFA/JA complete evaluation is at Exhibit B. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation were forwarded to the applicant on 2 Sep 11 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, this office has received no response. _________________________________________________________________ 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 error or injustice. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant's submission, we are not persuaded that a change in his officer candidate rating is required. Neither does the record reveal nor has the applicant provided evidence that would lead us to believe his officer candidate rating is not an accurate picture of his time in the military. In view of the above and absent evidence to the contrary, we agree with the assessment of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden that he has suffered either an error or an injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-02612 in Executive Session on 10 Nov 11, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 Jul 11, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, HQ USAFA/JA, dated 9 Aug 11. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 Sep 11. Panel Chair