RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02093 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He believes his record to be unjust because he was discharged without proper legal counsel. The applicant did not provide any documentation in support of his request. The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 5 Mar 92, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force. On 29 Apr 97, 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, Administrative Separation of Airmen for Minor Disciplinary Infractions and Unsatisfactory Performance. He acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge. He was informed that failure to consult counsel or to submit statements on his own behalf would not constitute a waiver of his right to do so. For a full accounting of the offenses, see the commander’s notification letter at Exhibit B. On 8 May 97, the Chief, Military and Civil Affairs Division reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient and recommended the applicant receive a general (under honorable conditions) discharge without the offer of probation or rehabilitation. On 22 May 97, the discharge authority approved the applicant’s discharge. On 27 May 97, the applicant was discharged for Misconduct with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). He served 5 years, 2 months and 23 days of total active service. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial. Based on the applicant’s overall performance, the discharge authority approved an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. According to AFI 36-3208, paragraph 1.18.2, a general discharge is appropriate when “significant negative aspects of the airman’s conduct or performance of duty outweighs the positive aspects of the airman’s military record.” The applicant’s misconduct in this case clearly outweighed the positive aspects of his service. His misconduct in this case, as evidenced by the one Article 15, three letters of reprimand, one record of counseling, and three letters of counseling, which occurred during his current enlistment provides a legally sufficient basis to support discharge action for misconduct based on minor disciplinary infractions under AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.49. The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices in the processing of his separation. Bsed on the documentation on file in the applicant’s master personnel records, his discharge was appropriately administrered and was properly reflected on his DD Form 214. The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 5 Aug 13, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, this office has not received a 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. 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. While the applicant states that he was not afforded legal counsel, according to the Receipt of the Notification letter dated 29 Apr 97, the applicant acknowledged that he understood his right to consult counsel and to submit statements in his own behalf. Additionally, he also acknowledged that he was given a military appointment to consult with military counsel. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof that he has been the victim of an error or injustice. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the characterization of the applicant’s discharge based on clemency; however, after considering his overall record of service, we are not persuaded the characterization of the applicant’s discharge warrants an upgrade to honorable on this basis. In view of the above and 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 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 Docket Number BC-2013-02093 in Executive Session on 11 Feb 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Apr 13. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 8 Jul 13. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Aug 13. Panel Chair