AIR FORCE BOARD FOR  CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NUMBER:  98-01796- 

COUNSEL:  NONE 

HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

MQ 2 7  s988 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

His general  (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to 
honorable. 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

-was 
found  guilty  for possession  of  a  controlled  substance. 
Since his discharge it has been difficult to  find a decent  job. 
states  & has  had  no  trouble  with  the  law  since  being 
discharged from the Air Force.  a h a s  been a good citizen, has a 
good work record, and has been going to church for 15 years. 
In support of the appeal, applicant submits a personal statement, 
Terrant County criminal record, and other documentation. 

Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A. 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from 
the  applicant's  military  records,  are  contained  in  the  Brief 
prepared  by  the  Examiner  from  the  Air  Force  Discharge  Review 
Board  (AFDRB).  Accordingly,  there  is  no  need  to  recite  these 
facts in this Record of Proceedings. 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

Applicant's request f o r   an upgrade of discharge was denied by the 
AFDRB on 2 May 1979  (Exhibit C). 

98-01796 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

Applicant  has  provided  post-service  documentation  which  is 
attached at Exhibit E. 

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.  We find no impropriety in the characterization of applicant's 
discharge. 
It  appears  that  responsible  officials  applied 
appropriate standards in effecting the separation, and we do not 
find persuasive evidence that pertinent regulations were violated 
or  that  applicant  was  not  afforded  all  the  rights  to  which 
entitled at the time of discharge.  We conclude, therefore, that 
the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the 
discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances. 

also  find  insufficient  evidence  to  warrant  a 
4.  We 
recommendation  that  the  discharge  be  upgraded  on  the  basis  of 
We  have  considered  applicant's  overall  quality  of 
clemency. 
service,  the  events  which  precipitated  the  discharge,  and 
available  evidence  related  to  post-service  activities  and 
accomplishments.  On balance, we do not believe that clemency is 
warranted. 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not 
demonstrate  the  existence  of  probable  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 followinq members of the Board considered this aDDlication in 
Executive Session on 29 October 1998, under the provisions of A F I  
36-2603: 

L L  

98-01796 

Mr. Vaughn E. Schlunz, Panel Chair 
Mr. Loren S. Perlstein, Member 
Mr. Terry A. Yonkers, Member 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 July 1998, w/atchs. 
Exhibit B. 
Exhibit C.  AFDRB  Brief, dated 2 May 1979, w/atchs. 
Exhibit D. 
Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atchs. 
Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atchs. 

Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

Panel Chair 

3 

. _. .... . ... . . . . 

, AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD 

'ERSONAL  APPEARANCL. 

.. . . ~  

I  I  X I  

AFM  39-12 
10 Jul 76 

BAD CONDUCT 

I 

I PRELIMINARY OFFER/REPLY 

bplicsntr ressont/contentions and the Board's decisional rational are discussed on the attached AFHQ Form 0454. 

CONCLUSIONS 

THE  AIR  FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD CONCLUDED THAT: 

THE DISCHARGE SHOULD N O T  BE CHANGED 

THE APPLICANT SHOULD RECEIVE (QpeofDficharge) 

ZEMARKS 

Case was  heard  a t  W a s h i n g t o n ,   DC;  Advise applicant of  the right 
application to SAI?/B!ICEL 

subnit an 

r Force Personnel Council 

Air From Discharge Review Board 
Washington,  D.C.  20330 

4DVISE THE APPLICANT,  N E X T  OF KIN, L E G A L  GUARDIAN, OR OTHER OF THE BOARDS DECISION.  SEE  REMARKS SECTION FOR 
4DDlTlONAL INSTRUCTIONS. 
4AME AND ADDRESS O F  PERSON TO BE NOTIFIED 
If other than indicated on application) 

D A T E  O F  HEARING 

CASE NUMEER 

PREVIOUS EDITION W I L L  BE USED. 

I 

brief. 

The  awlicant appeals  for Upgraae of  d i s d y g e  to Honorable.  The  appli- 

GENE=: 
cant's  statement is antained h the at- 
The  applicant was  offered a personal apg?earanoe'before  the D i s a a r g e  Review..-Board, 
On 
w i t h  counsel,  but did not respond  to a letter sent to  the  latest knm  address. 
19 M a r &   1979,  American  Red  Cmss reprsemtive,his  authorized  mumel,  requested 
that case be submitted  to  the  D i s c h a r g e  &view  Board  on the remrd, 
FINDING:  The  attached brief  Contains  the pertinent data on the applicant  and  the 
factors leading to the discharge, 
The  applicant was  provided  full adninistrative due process  and  after thomugh  legal 
review, the  Ilischarge authority ordered a Genaal Discharge. 
The  applicant's  contentions are addressed as follws:  m l i c a n t  was  in the process  c 
being  adninistratiwly  separated with an Honorable  D i s c h a r g e   for  apathy  and defectiTfi 
attitude based on his disciplinary record and  duty p r f o m ~ .  He  received punish- 
lrrent  under M c l e  15 on  two occasions  and a  letter of reprimand  for failure to go or 
--_ two occasions.  When  he was  Convicted by the civil court on  the marijuana  darye, 
his case was  returned to his cxxrmander,  who  then initiated separation based on  his 
civil mnviction.  Applicant makes  no  claim of  injustice or  impropriety.  H e  cites  ' 
his  desire t o  enlist in another bran&  of  the military service. 
CCNCLUSICNS:  The  D i s c h a r y e  Review Board  cnndudes  that the disd.large was  a m i s t e n t  
w i t h  the procedurdl  and  substantive requirenmts of  the discharge regulation  and was 
w i t h i n  the sound discretion of  the disdnarge  authority.  The  Board  further candudes 
that the applicant's  discharge  should not be  changed. 

m l i c a n t ' s   conviction  i n  a civil court for possessing  a quanaty of  m i -  
REEDS: 
juana  and also for supplying marijuana to another person is clear mTsuEi&&t  &si 
for his discharge mder  a m e n t  policies and  regulations  just as  it was a t  the time 
of  his  discharge.  TIE  nature  of  this misamdluct,ad~ to his p=vious  disciplinary 
problem~so markedly  d e t r a c t s f m  the character of  his overall due  performance that 
a General  Discharge is proper. 

-7-------- 

1 Attachment 
Ekaminer's  B r i e f  

.--... ---... 
.."  ..... 
.  ,

.

 

. ..-_ 

.- . . . .- 

DEPARTMENT  OF  THE  A I R   FORCE 

A I R   FORCE  DISCHARGE  REVIEW  BOARD 

WASHINGTON,  D.  C. 

Former 

\ 

.. 

- t:t, 

I 

1.  MATTER UNDER  REVIEW:  A p p l   recd  a Gen Disch  fr USAF  10 J u l  76.  U p  Ch  2  Sec  C 

AFM  39-12  (Conviction by- c i v i l  court - possession/supplying  marijuana) . 
Appeals  f o r  Hon  Disch  - En1 i n  US  N a v y .  

2.  BACKGROUND : 

a.  DOB: 

17 Mar  55.  Enlmt  age:  18 2/12  yrs.  Disch  age:  21  4/12  yrs. 

Education:  2  y r s   HS.  AFQT:  513.  AQE:  Ml5, A30,  G40,  E45. 
AFSC: 

81150  Secty Spec1 

3.  SERVICE  UNDER  REVIEW: 

a.  En1  as  AB  30  May  73,  f o r   4  y r s .  

Served  3  y r s ,   1 DO,  11 days. 

O/S: 

1 y r ,   3 mos,  10 days  (England) 

b.  Grade  Status:  AMN  30  Sep  73 
A1C  30  Nov  74 

c.  Art  15: 

(1') F  E  Warren  AFB, 3  May  74:  On  11 Apr  74,  wrongfully  t r a n s f e r   t o  

another  individual  t h e  r e g i s t r a t i o n   number 
place  f o r  wrongful  display  upon  a  vehicle. 
(Mitigation not  submitted).  Forf  $75. 
, (Not  appealed). 

- 

(2)  Englan 

,  23  Jan  76:  On  16 Jan  76,  being  posted  as  a  s e n t i n e l  - found 

sleeping  upon  post, 
AMN  (Suspended  u n t i l   25  Jul  76) , Forf  $90. 
(Not  appealed) . 

(Oral mitigation).  Reduced  t o  

d.  Record  of  Service: 

30  May  73  -  1 Dec  74  F  E  Warren  AFl3 
2  Dec  74  -  1 Dec  75  England 
Dischd-  fr McGuire  AFB, N J  

. 

e.  A w a r d s :   NDSM 

Block  7 
Block  6 

9

.

 

I 

, 

1 

t 

- 
E 

s 

' '  4.  FACTS  LEADING  UP  TO  DISCHARGE: 

a.  On  3  Jun  76,  Comdr  recommended  airman be  dischd  UP  Ch 2  Sec  C  AFM  39-12. 

Disch  f o r  misconduct  because  of  c i v i l   court  disposition.  17 May  76 

Reasons: 
convicted  i n  Mildenhall  Magistrates  Court  f o r  possession  of  a  quanty  of 
Cannabis  Resin  w/o  being  duly  authorited  on  16 Jan  76  and Supplying  a  . 
controlled drug  (Cannabis  Resin)  w/o  being  duly  authorized  on  16 Jan  76.. 
Fined  a  t o t a l  of  H200 and  ordered  t o  pay  a  b15 advicate's  fee. 
Recommend 
Gen  Disch. 

.  . 

T r i a l  Observer's  Report. 

Court  Order 

A r t   15 case  f i l e .  
L t r  of  Reprimand  , 9  Dec  74:  Failed  t o  r e p a i r   22  Oct  74  and  14 Nov  74. 

b.  On  9  Jun  76,  airman  signed waiver  of  board  hearing. 

I 1 
4  Stmt s  (Chaplain/NCOIC  Drug-alcohol  Abuse  Control/Operations  Superintendent : 

Stmt  of  Airman  (Atchd  t o  Examiner's  B r i e f )  

c.  Legal  Review, 

(Resume  of  Facts) ... .. . .. 

Because  of  t h i s   conviction  h i s  

9  Jun  76: 
P r i o r   t o  c i v i l   conviction  airman  had  been  approved  f o r   disch  Sec  A 
AFM  39-12  f o r   apathy  and  defective  a t t i t u d e .  
case w a s   returned  t o  t h e   Comdr  t o  determine  i f   other  action  was  more 
appropriate. 
The  C o m d r   determined  t h a t   action  under  Sec  C  was  more 
appropriate  and  t h e  Sec  A  action w a s   withdrawn. 
Although  the  airman  s t a t e s   i n  h i s   waiver  s t m t   t h a t   he  i s  not  submitting 
s t m t s   i n  h i s   own  behalf  t h e r e   a r e   several  stmts  atchd which  were  originally 
atchd  t o  t h e   Sec  A  disch  action. 
t h a t   airman  had  potential  t o  remain  i n  t h e   seririce. 
be  pointed  out  t h a t   they  were  a l l  written  before  h i s   a r r e s t   and  conviction 
on  t h e   drug  offenses by  t h e  B r i t i s h   authorities. 
Recommendation: 
On  3 J u l  76,  Hq  USAFE  directed Gen  Disch  Ch  2  Sec  C  AFM  39-12. 
appropriate. 

The  s t m t s  indicate  t h a t   t h e   r a t e r s   f e e l  

Gen  Disch  and  t h a t   P/R  not  be  offered. 

Cites  A r t   15 actions. 

However,  it  should 

Legally  sufficient. 

P/R  not 

d. 

5.  BASIS  ,ADVANCED  FOR  REVIEW:  (Appln  DD  Form  293,  dtd 15 Aug '78) : 

Request  Hon  Disch,  Change  Reenl  Code. 
able t o  have  my  disch  upgraded  when  I  got  out. 
of  t h e  military. 
Navy. 

If there would  be  any way  possible  I would  l i k e  t o  en1  i n  t h e  

A t   t h e  t i m e   of  disch  I w a s   told' I would  be 

1.wanted bo  make  a  career  out 

Brief  completed  20  Sep  78  r c  

t 

2 

-... "_._ 
.. .. 
..-._. . 

- 

i 
! 
i 
i I 
i 
I 

' -  

! 

here 

t 

-

1

 

U 

2 

t