RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01757 COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. 2. His narrative reason for separation be removed. __________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The narrative reason for separation “Discreditable Involvement with Military or Civil Authorities” is a bad reflection of his overall character and has raised questions and/or concerns from employers that require background checks. He has been an outstanding citizen in his community and does not feel that an incident (car accident) where he disagreed with civilian authorities in the United Kingdom should reflect on his overall military or civilian career. He has never had any other altercations nor has he been arrested for any reason over the past 25 years since his discharge from the Air Force. In support of his request the applicant provides a copy of DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States. His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. __________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 30 Sep 1983, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force for a period of four years. On 2 Oct 1987, his commander notified him that he was recommending he be discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen. The specific reasons for his action are reflected in the Notification Memorandum at Exhibit B. On 2 Oct 1987, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification. On 8 Oct 1987, the Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) found the discharge legally sufficient. On 23 Oct 1987, he was discharged from the Air Force with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. He received a narrative reason for separation of “Discreditable Involvement with Military or Civil Authorities.” He served a total of four years, one month and eight days of active duty. On 4 Dec 2013, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C). In an undated letter the applicant states that during his tour in England he suffered from a sleep disorder which led to two car accidents and a recommendation from his first sergeant to obtain a mental health evaluation. He subsequently requested to leave the Air Force. After leaving the Air Force he spent a number of years evaluating his career opportunities, going back to school and finalizing his degree. Today he manages three successful companies in Florida and holds three business patents with the U.S. Patent Office. He has a wonderful family, is an active member of the Church and is a very devout Christian. The choices he made when he was young do not reflect the person he is today. He implores the Board to consider his post-service activities and upgrade his discharge and change his narrative reason for separation of "Discernible [sic] Involvement with Military or Civil Authorities," as there is no supporting documentation. In further support of his request, the applicant provides a resume of his accomplishments in business and brief references from personal and business relationships. His complete response, with attachments, 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 error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission, to include his response to the post service request, 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 believes a car accident was the basis for his discharge, the evidence reflects that during the period of 1 Nov 1986 through 15 Aug 1987, he wrongfully appropriated approximately $1,700. 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 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 this application in Executive Session on 30 Jan 2014, under the provisions of AFI 36- 2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC- 2013-01757: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Mar 2013, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, undated. Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atch. Panel Chair 2 2