RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01838

  			COUNSEL:  NONE

			HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general discharge be changed to an Honorable.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He started going back to college and wishes to qualify for 
Department of Veteran’s Affairs (DVA) benefits since he was in 
the military for about seven months.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 4 Mar 98, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force.

On 31 Jul 98, he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for making 
a false statement regarding completing squadron aerobic 
activities.  He acknowledged receipt the same day.

On 3 Aug 98, he received a Letter of Counseling (LOC) for 
failing to show up for the squadron airborne physical fitness 
test.  He acknowledged receipt the same day.

On 4 Aug 98, he received an LOC for departing the gymnasium 
without fulfilling his aerobic commitment.  He received a second 
LOC for speeding on base (40 miles per hour (mph) in a 30 mph 
zone).  He acknowledged receipt of both LOCs that same day.  

On 14 Aug 98, he received an LOR for operating a motor vehicle 
in a reckless manner in the dormitory parking lot traveling 22 
miles per hour over the speed limit, for which he received a 
second moving violation on base within a 4-day period.  The 
applicant acknowledged receipt the same day.

On 5 Oct 98, he received an Article 15 under the Uniform Code of 
Military Justice (UCMJ) for the following offenses:

a)	On or about 22 Sep 98, he failed to go to his appointed 
place of duty at the time prescribed, to wit:  3d Aerial 
Port Squadron Dormitory, Bldg 399;

b)	On or about 24 Sep 98, he failed to go to his appointed 
placed of duty at the time prescribed, to wit:  Dental 
Clinic, Bldg 5242;

c)	On or about 24 Sep 98, he made an official statement with 
the intent to deceive, to wit: “My dental appointment for 
today has been cancelled and it has to be rescheduled.  The 
Dental Clinic personnel advised me to call back on Tuesday 
to try to coordinate a new appointment,” or words to that 
effect, which was a false statement in that his dental 
appointment was not cancelled and was then known by him to 
be false;

d)	On or about 23 Sep 98, he made an official statement with 
the intent to deceive to his First Sergeant, to wit:  “I was 
notified that I had Bay Orderly duty on Monday, 21 Sep 98,” 
“I did not know what time I was supposed to report for 
duty,” or words to that effect, which is a false statement 
in that he did know he had Bay Orderly duty and what time to 
report for duty.  It was known to be a false statement.

His commander punished him with reduction in grade to airman 
basic with new date of rank of 5 Oct 98, 15 days restriction to 
the Air Force Base, forfeiture of $463.00 per month for two 
months and 15 days of extra duty suspended until 4 Apr 99 after 
which time it will be remitted.  He acknowledged receipt the 
same day stating he would not submit a written statement or 
appeal.  His commander also state the information would be filed 
in an Unfavorable Information File (UIF.)  The Judge Advocate 
found the action legally sufficient.  

On 16 Oct 98, he received an Article 15, UCMJ for failing to go 
to his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time.  His 
commander punished him with restricting him to the Air Force 
Base and gave him 15 days of extra duty.  The applicant 
acknowledged receipt the same day stating he would not submit a 
written statement or appeal.  His commander also stated the 
information would be filed in a UIF.  

On 18 Oct 98, the Judge Advocate (JA) found the action legally 
sufficient. 

On 21 Oct 98, the applicant was notified by his squadron 
commander he was recommending his discharge for minor 
disciplinary infractions under the provisions of AFPD 36-32, 
Military Retirements and Separations, and AFI 36-3208, 
Administrative Separation of Airmen, paragraph 5.49.  He 
acknowledged receipt the same day indicating he had consulted 
counsel and was submitting a statement for consideration.

On 26 Oct 98, the applicant’s squadron commander recommended he 
be discharged under the provisions of AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-
3208, paragraph 5.49.  The Acting Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) 
concurred with the squadron commander’s recommendation.  The 
separation authority approved the commander’s recommendation.  
The applicant acknowledged receipt indicating he waived his 
right to consult counsel and submit statements.      

On 28 Oct 98, the applicant received a general, under honorable 
conditions discharge.  He was credited with 7 months and 25 days 
of active service.  He had 5 months and 11 days prior inactive 
service.   
  
On 10 Jun 14, the clemency bulletin 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 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.  
In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the 
discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the 
evidence presented is sufficient to overcome the misconduct that 
formed the basis of the discharge.  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 documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-01838 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Apr 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Clemency Bulletin, dated 10 Jun 14.