RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01451
					COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to 
honorable.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His military record shows outstanding effort and performance prior 
to 1986 after which his attitude and conduct deteriorated due to 
his reassignment stateside.  It should not be a reflection for his 
entire military career.  

Additionally, he did not realize the damage a less than honorable 
discharge would have on a veteran when he requested his release 
from the Air Force.  He has spent many years reflecting upon this.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 13 Nov 
1981.

On 25 Aug 88, his squadron commander recommended he be discharged 
from the United States Air Force for Unsatisfactory Performance—
Irresponsibility in the Management of Personal Finances and 
Misconduct—Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline 
pursuant to AFR 39-10, Airman Separation Manual, Chapter 5, 
Paragraphs 5-26d and 5-47b respectively.  The specific reasons for 
the proposed discharge are as follows: 
 
a)	On 24 Nov 87, he disobeyed a lawful order from a superior 
Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO) for failing to attempt night 
foot navigation while attending training;

b)	Between 27 Mar 88-27 Jun 88, failed to pay his NCO Club bill 
and had a delinquent bill dated 30 Jun 88;

c)	Between 27 Mar-15 Jul 88, issued 14 checks without sufficient 
funds to cover them;

d)	Between 11 Jul-3 Aug 88, failed to meet financial obligations 
at an on-base establishment;

e)	Between 22 Jul-25 Jul 88 was Absent Without Official Leave 
(AWOL).   

The following record of disciplinary action was also included in 
the recommendation: 

a)	Receiving non-judicial punishment for disobeying orders from 
a Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO) on 24 November and 30 Nov 87 
resulting in two Articles 15 of the Uniform Code of Military 
Justice (UCMJ); received a suspended reduction to the grade 
of airman first class (E-3) and forfeited $100 for one month.

b)	Receiving non-judicial punishment under Article 15, UCMJ on 
25 Jul 88, for three specifications:  cashing a check for 
$150.00 without sufficient funds on 17 May 88, cashing a 
check for $50.00 without sufficient funds on 21 May 88, and 
being AWOL on 22 Jul 88; reduced to the grade of E-3 with a 
new date of rank of 5 Aug 88 and 30 days extra duties. 

On 26 Aug 88, he acknowledged receipt and offered a conditional 
waiver of the rights associated with an administrative discharge 
board, contingent upon receiving a general discharge.

On 27 Sep 88, the Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) recommended 
acceptance of the applicant’s offer of a conditional waiver for a 
general discharge and on 12 Oct 1988, found his discharge legally 
sufficient.   

On 18 Oct 88, the separation authority approved the discharge 
under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Chapter 5, paragraph 5-26d and 
5-47b, Misconduct – Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and 
Discipline.   

On 21 Oct 88, the applicant was furnished a general under 
honorable conditions discharge.  He was credited with 1 year, 
1 month and 24 days of active service for this enlistment.  His 
prior active service was 5 years, 9 months, and 15 days beginning 
on 13 Nov 81.  

On 17 Apr 14, a request for post-service information was forwarded 
to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit 
C).  As of this date, no response has been received by this 
office.


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 recommend granting relief on 
that basis.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the 
contrary, we find no basis 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-2014-01451 in Executive Session on 21 Nov 14 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 31 Mar 14.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Information Bulletin, not dated. 


FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – PRIVACY ACT OF 1974

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
3