RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-05868

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

It has been 22 years since his discharge and he would like his 
character of service changed.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 10 Feb 88, the applicant commenced his enlistment in the 
Regular Air Force (RegAF).

On 19 Jun 90, the applicant’s commander notified him he was 
recommending his discharge from the Air Force for minor 
disciplinary infractions.  The reasons for the discharge action 
included the applicant being late for duty, not reporting for 
duty, delinquent payment of debts, and uttering checks with 
insufficient funds, for which he received verbal counseling, 
Unfavorable Information File entries, placement on a Control 
Roster, a Letter of Counseling (LOC), four Letters of Reprimand 
(LORs), and an Article 15.  .

After consulting with legal counsel, the applicant acknowledged 
receipt of the action and elected to submit a statement in his 
own behalf.

On 23 Jul 90, the legal office reviewed the case and found it 
legally sufficient to support separation and recommended the 
applicant be furnished a general discharge without probation and 
rehabilitation.

The discharge authority concurred with the findings and 
recommendation and directed the applicant’s discharge.  On 
26 Jul 90, the applicant was furnished a general (under 
honorable conditions) discharge and was credited with 2 years, 5 
months, and 17 days of total active service.

On 4 Sep 13, a request for post-service information was 
forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 
30 days (Exhibit C).  In response, the applicant indicates that 
after his discharge, he continued to work as a Firefighter/EMT 
and also volunteered with various local fire departments.  He 
also obtained certification in Fire Technology from the local 
community college.  The applicant’s complete response, with 
attachment, is at Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

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, to include his 
rebuttal response, 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 was consistent with the 
substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and 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.  In the interest of justice, we 
considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, 
we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to compel us 
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-2012-05868 in Executive Session on 22 Oct 13, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Dec 12.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 4 Sep 13, w/atch.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atch.




                                   
                                   Panel Chair