RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-02220

		COUNSEL:  NONE
  
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  He be issued a DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.  

2.  His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable.  

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was never provided a DD Form 214 or informed of any charges that resulted in his discharge from the United States Air Force Reserve (USAFR).  The lack of this documentation affects his entitlement to veteran affairs benefits.  

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.  

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant’s military personnel records indicate that he enlisted in the Air Force Reserve on 8 Dec 98.  

On 4 May 01, the Chief, of Military Personnel Operations notified the applicant of his initiation action for discharge from the Air Force for a Pattern of Misconduct – Commission of a Serious Offense.  The reasons for the action were as follows:

		a)  The applicant deceitfully obtained a government vehicle for his personal use for which he received a letter of reprimand (LOR) on 10 Dec 99.  

		b)  The applicant falsified documents, lied, and misrepresented himself as a commissioned officer for which he received a LOR on 10 Dec 99.  

		c)  The applicant downloaded pornographic material on a government computer and misrepresented himself as a commissioned officer for which he received a LOR on 14 Oct 00.  

On 12 Aug 01, the applicant was furnished an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge.  

On 17 Apr 03, the applicant submitted a DD Form 293, Application for Review of Discharge or Dismissal From The Armed Forces of the United States, requesting his UOTHC discharge be upgraded to honorable.  Specifically, he indicated his characterization of service was used as punishment to make him an example for submitting a report to the inspector general.  

On 23 Sep 03, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge, concluding that his discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, was within the discretion of the discharge authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative due process.  

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C.  

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFRC/A1K recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  The applicant contends he was not notified of his UOTHC discharge from the USAFR.  However, AFRC/A1KK was able to account for the applicant being sent formal notification of the initiation of administrative discharge action, as well as the basis for his discharge via a database report administered and maintained by AFRC/A1KK.  All administrative discharges processed by AFRC/A1KK are maintained in this database.  Lastly, the applicant was not entitled to a DD Form 214 at the time of his discharge from the USAFR because he was not serving on active duty.  

A complete copy of the AFRC/A1K 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 14 Aug 13 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (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 with respect to the applicant’s discharge.  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 process.  Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the applicant’s UOTHC discharge for a Pattern of Misconduct – Commission of a Serious Offense was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the commander’s discretionary authority.  He has provided no evidence which would lead us to believe the characterization of his service was improper or contrary to the provisions of the governing directive.  Also, while the applicant alleges his characterization of service was used as punishment to make him as an example for submitting a report to the inspector general, he failed to provide the final report or any other documentation from a proper investigating authority to substantiate his allegation.  In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, in the absence of any evidence related to the applicant’s activities since leaving the service, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis.  As for the request related to the issuance of a DD Form 214, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our opinion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice with respect to his discharge documentation from the Air Force Reserve.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.  

________________________________________________________________

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-2013-02220 in Executive Session on 13 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 3 May 13, w/atch.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/A1K, dated 23 Jul 13.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Aug 13.




                                   
                                   Panel Chair







4