RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01333
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL:
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REOUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He had been treated harshly by the Air Force and penalized for
circumstances over which he had no control. His ignorance and choice of
companions did not warrant a discharge for Misconduct Drug Abuse or a
downgrade of an honorable discharge to a general discharge.
In support of his appeal the applicant submits a personal statement and
several letters of recommendation (Exhibit A).
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant entered the Regular Air Force on 11 Dec 81 for a period of
four years. On or about 19 Feb 85 the applicant submitted a urine sample in
a unit sweep. His sample proved positive for marijuana. The applicant's
unit commander recommended he be honorably discharged without probation and
rehabilitation. On 18 Apr 85 he was separated from the Air Force under the
provisions of AFR 39-10 (Misconduct) with a general (under honorable
conditions) discharge. The applicant was credited with 3 years, 4 months
and 8 days of active duty service.
In response to the Board's request for information, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI) indicated that, on the basis of the information
provided, they were unable to locate an arrest record pertaining to the
applicant
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPRS reviewed the case and recommended denial. DPPRS states the
discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements
of the discharge regulation at the time of the applicant's discharge from
active duty. The discharge action that was taken was within the discretion
of the discharge authority and the applicant was provided full
administrative due process. The records indicate that the member's military
service was properly reviewed and appropriate action was taken. DPPRS
indicates that the applicant did not submit any new evidence, identify any
errors in the discharge process, nor provide facts that warrant an upgrade
of his discharge. Accordingly DPPRS recommends his records remain unchanged
and his request be denied.
A complete copy of the advisory is at Exhibit C.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant
for review and comment. On behalf of the applicant, the Department of
Veterans Affairs (DVA) indicated that the letters of recommendation
submitted by the applicant should be considered as evidence in support of
an upgrade. They attest to the applicant's high moral character, his
exceptional family values and his admirable work ethic. The applicant has
consistently denied using drugs and evidence submitted prior to his
discharge support his contention. To subject the applicant to the stigma of
a discharge that states his service was general and add further shame by
noting misconduct-drug abuse is a travesty of justice.
A complete copy of the submission is 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. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of probable error or injustice. We have noted the applicant's
contentions and allegations concerning the urinalysis testing. Other than
his own assertions, the applicant has provided no convincing evidence that
would lead us to believe that his urine sample was improperly processed or
that the determination that the sample contained THC at a level sufficient
to confirm it as positive was erroneous. It is our opinion that the
punitive action taken against the applicant was warranted and in compliance
with the Air Force's drug abuse policy that was in effect at the time.
Therefore, based on the available evidence of record, we find no basis upon
which to favorably consider the requested relief.
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 following members of the Board considered this application in Executive
Session on October 24, 2000, under the provisions of AFI36-2603:
Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Acting Panel Chair Ms. Barbara J. White-Olson,
Member Mr. Daniel F. Wenker, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. Exhibit B. Exhibit C. Exhibit D. Exhibit E.
DD Form 149, undated, w/atchs.
Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 15 Jun 00.
Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 07 Jul 00.
Letter, DAV, dated 13 Jul 00, w/atchs.
PATRICIA D. VESTAL
Acting Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00933
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00933 INDEX CODE: 106.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: Yes MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 19 Sep 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 1985 general discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 6 Nov 85, the commander recommended the applicant be separated with a general discharge for drug abuse. Accordingly, we recommend...
The relevant facts, extracted from the available record, are contained in the letter prepared by the apapropriate office of the Air Force. Should a check of the Federal Bureau of Investigation files prove negative, DPPRS recommends his discharge be upgraded to under honorable conditions (general). Having found no error or injustice with regard to the actions that occurred while the applicant was a military member, we conclude that no basis exists to grant favorable action on his request.
A copy of the AFDRB Hearing Record is appended at Exhibit C. Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, WV, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Separations Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, stated that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation at the time of his discharge from...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-03141 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded and his Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed from “2B” to “3A.” _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His discharge was inequitable and his service should have...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03256
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03256 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reason for discharge be changed to retirement. JA states that an administrative discharge board heard his case and recommended his discharge from the Air Force. In the absence of persuasive evidence that the evidence contained in...
AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD00-00040
ATR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD ‘NAME OF SERVICE MEMRAER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) ~ PERSONAL APPEARANCE AIC GRADE AYSN/S84N X RECORD REVIEW NAME GF COUNSEL AND OK ORGANZA THOM ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION GF COLINSEL — M EMBERS SITTING HON GEN OTHC OTHER DENY at peer “INDEX NUMBER“ "" ERE PRIBIIS SUUMIFTED TO THE BOAR AQLS7 A66.00 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE LETTER OF NOTIFICATION HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER GRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE ae et 23...
The applicant applied to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) in Jul 00 to upgrade his discharge to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Directorate of Personnel Program Management, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied on the basis that regardless of the fact the AFBCMR upgraded his discharge, he was still...
On 3 Nov 00, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend involuntary discharge from the Air Force for the commission of a serious offense (misconduct cited in the Article 15). On 5 Jul 00, the applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) for an honorable discharge and a different reason and authority for discharge. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, referred the appeal to...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00338
The applicant, while serving in the grade of airman, was discharged from the Air Force on 11 July 1985 under the provisions of AFR 39-10 (misconduct - pattern of discreditable involvement with military or civil authorities) with an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 4 April 2003, a copy of the Air...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02966
On 27 Jan 88, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied his request to upgrade his general discharge to honorable. By letter, dated 15 Oct 03, the Separations Branch (AFPC/DPPRSP) notified the applicant that his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, had been administratively corrected to reflect his AFSC as 81152, rather than 81132, and his character of service to reflect Under Honorable Conditions (General), rather than General. ...