RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01703

						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, Item 18, REMARKS, be corrected to reflect "Continuous 
Honorable Active Military Service from 17 Jan 1986 to 22 Jan 
2007”.  


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His continuous honorable active military service date should be 
through 22 Jan 07, which is the date of his court-martial.  It 
currently reflects 17 Jan 86 to 9 Jan 02.  This is not 
consistent with his Enlisted Performance Reports (EPRs) or his 
Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM).  

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 
17 Jan 86.

According to the DD Form 4, Enlistment/Reenlistment Document 
Armed Forces of the United States, in the applicant’s official 
military personnel record, his last reenlistment took place on 
10 Jan 02, for a period of four years.

According to the AF IMT, 1411, Extension or Cancellation of 
Extensions of Enlistments in the Regular Air Force/Air Force 
Reserve, in the applicant’s official military personnel record, 
the applicant extended his enlistment on 7 Jun 05, for a period 
of one month for the purpose of retirement.  

According to Special Court-Martial Order Number 18, dated 
27 Apr 07, the applicant was charged with the following offenses 
during a general court-martial.

Charge 1:  Article 120.  Plea G. Finding G.

Specification 1:  On diverse occasions between on or about 
1 Jun 01 and on or about 9 Jul 05, rape C.H., a person who had 
attained the age of 12 but was under the age of 16.  Plea:  NG, 
but to the lesser included offense of carnal knowledge, G.   
Finding:  G, except the word “rape” substituting therefore the 
words, “commit the offense of carnal knowledge” of the excepted 
word, NG, of the substituted words, G.

Specification 2:  on Diverse occasions between on or about 
10 Jul 05 and on or about 7 Nov 05, rape C.H.  Plea:  NG.  
Finding:  Withdrawn by the Convening Authority pursuant to Pre-
trial Agreement.

Charge II:  Article 125.  Plea:  NG.  Finding:  Withdrawn by the 
Convening Authority pursuant to Pre-trial Agreement.

Specification 1:  on diverse occasions between on or about 
1 Jun 01 and on or about 9 Jul 05, commit sodomy with C.H., a 
child who had attained the age of 12 but was under the age of 
16, by force and without consent of C.H.  Plea:  NG.  Finding:  
Withdrawn by the Convening Authority pursuant to Pre-trial 
agreement.  

Specification 2:  on diverse occasions between on or about 
10 Jul 05 and on or about 7 Nov 05, commit sodomy with C.H., by 
force and without the consent of C.H.  Plea:  NG. Finding:  
Withdrawn by the Convening Authority pursuant to Pre-trial 
Agreement.

Charge III:  Article 134.  Plea:  G. Finding:  G.

Specification:  on diverse occasions between on or about 1 Jun 
01 and on or about 9 Jul 05, commit an indecent act upon the 
body of C.H., a female, under the age of 16, not the wife of the 
accused, by fondling her breasts and placing his hands upon her 
private parts, with the intent to arouse the sexual desires of 
the accused.  Plea: G, except the words “fondling her breasts 
and,” of the excepted words, NG.  Finding:  G, except the words 
“fondling her breasts and.”

The applicant’s sentence was adjudged on 23 Jan 07.  His 
punishment consisted of a dishonorable discharge, confinement 
for 18 years and 4 months, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, 
and reduction to Airman Basic (E-1).  Only so much of the 
sentence provided for a dishonorable discharge, confinement for 
15 years, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and reduction to 
airman basic was approved and, except for the dishonorable 
discharge, was executed.  Pursuant to Article 57(a), UCMJ, 
forfeiture of pay and allowances and reduction to airman basic 
were deferred effective 6 Feb 07 until the date of this action.

According to General Court-Martial Order Number 96, dated 
19 Jul 10, the applicant’s court-martial was affirmed.  The 
dishonorable discharge was executed as promulgated in General 
Court-Martial Order Number 17, forfeiture of all pay and 
allowances and reduction to airman basic were deferred effective 
6 Feb 07 until 7 Apr 07 (the date of the action).  

On 27 Sep 10, the applicant was furnished a dishonorable 
discharge, and was credited with 24 years, 8 months, and 11 days 
of active service.   

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the memorandums prepared by the Air Force office of 
primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C 
and F.    


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or an injustice.  IAW AFI 36-3202 (Separation 
Documents), Table 4, rule 30, directs "the to date is the date 
before the current enlistment".  The applicant's enlistment at 
the time of separation began 10 Jan 02; therefore, the period of 
continuous honorable active military service is from the date 
entered active service (17 Jan 1986) to the date prior to the 
enlistment contract that had service deemed not honorable 
(9 Jan 02).  The period of continuous honorable active service 
as recorded on the DD Form 214, was computed accurately.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In response, the applicant refutes virtually every point made by 
the OPR and argues that Table 4, rule 30 the OPR is referring to 
in the AFI only applies if a member is absent from duty, placed 
in either pretrial confinement or confinement after trial and 
therefore was not able to complete the current (last) enlistment 
he was obligated under contract to serve.  

His last re-enlistment began on 10 Jan 02, was a four year 
contract and ended in Jan 06.  This was completed and there is 
no lost time during that enlistment contract.  This four year 
contract cannot be excluded.  An extension occurred on that four 
year contract from 31 Jan 06 to 22 Jan 07 and should also be 
counted as good time.  

EPR’s from Jan 02 to Jan 06 show no lost time and provide 
evidence of being present for duty, to included time during the 
extension period.

A complete copy of the applicant’s response is at Exhibit E.


ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOR provides an additional advisory opinion in which 
they state that their original advisory dated 19 Jun 2014, is 
accurate and they find no errors in the application of AFI 36-
3202 to the processing of the applicant's DD Form 214.  The 
applicant has failed to prove the DD Form 214 was prepared in 
error.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit F.


APPLICANT’ REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:  

In response, the applicant reiterates that he does not have any 
lost time during his enlistment period from 2002 to 2006 nor 
during his extension.  His DD Form 214 reflects this is the 
case.  

The applicant contends other inmates with the same circumstances 
do not have the Continuous Honorable Active military Service 
statement on their DD Form 214   He contends this should be 
removed.  

The applicant provides copies of Enlisted Performance Reports 
(EPRs), a citation for award of an Air Force Achievement Medal, 
a Letter of Appreciation, military cases relative to his case, 
his DD Form 214, and AFI 36-3202, Table 4, Rule 30.

A complete copy of the applicant’s response, with attachments, 
is at Exhibit H.


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 in judging the 
merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and 
recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility 
(OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion 
the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice.  
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find 
no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.



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-2014-01703 in Executive Session on 9 Jul 15, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-01703 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 Apr 15, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 19 Jun 14.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Aug 14.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, dated 19 Aug 14.
	Exhibit F.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 22 Sep 14.
	Exhibit G.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Nov 14.
	Exhibit H.  Letter Applicant, dated 16 Jun 15.