RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03779 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He wants any issues concerning his discharge status resolved so he can proudly say he served his country. He would like to return to military service in the Guard or Reserve. He would appreciate the opportunity to present his case in person to the Board and is willing to travel in order to do so. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ _ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who entered active duty on 1 August 2001. On 28 April 2004, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend him for discharge for Misconduct: Minor Disciplinary Infractions, under the provisions of Air Force Program Directive 36-32 and Air Force Instruction 36-3208, paragraph 5.4. The commander’s specific reasons for the action where the applicant had received one Article 15 for dereliction of duty in that he failed to refrain from consuming alcohol while under the age of 21; two Letters of Reprimand (LORs) for underage drinking and a civil arrest for not using a turn signal, driving under the influence of alcohol, and refusing to submit to a blood alcohol test; an Unfavorable Information File (UIF), and a counseling record between 19 September 2002 and 9 April 2004. The applicant acknowledged his commander’s intent, consulted counsel, and submitted a statement in his own behalf. The base legal office reviewed the case and found it to be legally sufficient to support a basis for discharge. The discharge authority approved the separation and directed the applicant be discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service. The applicant was discharged from active duty in the grade of airman first class (E-3) effective 14 May 2004 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. He served 2 years, 9 months, and 14 days on active duty. On 5 June 2006, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request to upgrade his characterization of discharge from general to honorable and to change his reentry code. ________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial. DPSOR states that based on the documentation in the master personnel records, the discharge, to include his character of service, was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. The applicant did not provide any evidence of an error or injustice that occurred in the discharge processing. The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He does not have any physical evidence justifying his request for a change in discharge status; however, he could provide a list of names of members who received honorable discharges that participated in illegal acts. He wishes to have a formal hearing so he can explain what happened in person. He is not justifying his actions, as he knows many of them were due to his own bad judgment; however, he feels that his words have been twisted around and that he has not been allowed to fully explain his side of the story. He does agree with the military’s decision to reprimand him on some occasions, but he does not agree with the discharge characterization he was given. The applicant’s complete rebuttal 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 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. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission 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 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 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-2012-03779 in Executive Session on 18 June 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-03779 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Aug 12, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 10 Oct 12. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Oct 12. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 18 Nov 12. Panel Chair 4 3