Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0101455
Original file (0101455.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                        RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
          AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS




 IN THE MATTER OF:     DOCKET NUMBER:  01-01455
           INDEX CODE:  110.00


           COUNSEL:  NONE


           HEARING DESIRED:  NO
 _________________________________________________________________


 APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:


 His general discharge be upgraded to honorable.


 _________________________________________________________________


 APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:


 He knows he let the Air Force down but he has been clean and sober
 for 18 years.  He has strived to live a good, honest life  and  he
 feels he is succeeding at this  goal.   He  feels  he  has  proven
 himself to not only himself  but  his  family,  friends,  and  co-
 workers.  He does not have a police record and he has a good  work
 ethic.  Clemency is warranted because it is an injustice  for  him
 to continue to  suffer  the  adverse  consequences  of  a  general
 discharge.


 Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.


 _________________________________________________________________


 STATEMENT OF FACTS:


 The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force (RegAF) on  25 May
 79 for a period of four years.


 On 1 May 84, a urine sample was collected from the  applicant  and
 he was identified as having a positive urine test for THC.


 On 11 Jun 84, applicant was notified of his commander’s intent  to
 impose  nonjudicial  punishment  upon  him  for  wrongfully  using
 marijuana.


 On 11 Jun 84, applicant waived his right  to  a  trial  by  court-
 martial, requested a personal appearance, and  did  not  submit  a
 written presentation.


 On 22 Jun 84, he was found guilty by his commander who imposed the
 following punishment:  Reduction from the grade of sergeant to the
 grade of airman first class, ordered to forfeit $207 a  month  for
 one month, and to perform four days of extra duty.  Applicant  did
 not appeal the punishment.


 On 11 Sep 84,  applicant  was  notified  that  his  commander  was
 recommending that he be discharged from the  Air  Force  for  drug
 abuse.  The reason for  the  commander’s  action  was  applicant’s
 positive  urinalysis  on  1 May  84.   On  11 Sep  84,   applicant
 consulted counsel and waived his right to submit statements in his
 behalf.


 On 27 Sep 84, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of
 AFR 39-10 (Misconduct - Drug Abuse) with a  general  discharge  in
 the grade of airman first class.  He was credited with 5 years,  4
 months, and 3 days of active service.


 Pursuant  to  the  Board’s  request,   the   Federal   Bureau   of
 Investigation  (FBI),  Clarksburg,  West  Virginia,  provided   an
 investigative report indicating  that  based  on  the  information
 furnished, they were unable to  identify  with  an  arrest  record
 (Exhibit C).


 _________________________________________________________________


 AIR FORCE EVALUATION:


 The   Assistant   Noncommissioned    Officer-in-Charge    (NCOIC),
 Separation   Procedures   Section,   AFPC/DPPRS,   reviewed   this
 application and indicated that based upon the documentation in the
 file,  the  discharge  was  consistent  with  the  procedural  and
 substantive   requirements   of    the    discharge    regulation.
 Additionally, the discharge was within the sound discretion of the
 discharge  authority.   The  applicant  did  not  submit  any  new
 evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the
 discharge  processing.   Additionally,  he   provided   no   facts
 warranting  an  upgrade  of  his  discharge.   Accordingly,  DPPRS
 recommends his records remain the same and his request be denied.


 A complete copy  of  the  Air  Force  evaluation  is  attached  at
 Exhibit D.


 _________________________________________________________________


 APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:


 A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  applicant  on
 29 Jun 01 for review and response.  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 probable error or  injustice.   After
 careful consideration of the circumstances of this  case  and  the
 evidence provided by the applicant, we are not persuaded that  the
 discharge action was in error or unjust.  His contentions are duly
 noted; however, we  do  not  find  these  assertions,  in  and  by
 themselves, sufficiently  persuasive  to  override  the  rationale
 provided  by  the  Air  Force.   We  therefore  agree   with   the
 recommendation of the Air Force and adopt the rationale  expressed
 as the basis for our decision that the  applicant  has  failed  to
 sustain his burden that he has suffered  either  an  error  or  an
 injustice.  Therefore, we find no compelling  basis  to  recommend
 granting the relief sought.


 _________________________________________________________________


 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 23 August 2001, under the provisions  of  Air
 Force Instruction 36-2603:



                  Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Panel Chair

                  Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Member
                  Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Member


 The following documentary evidence was considered:


      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 Apr 01, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  FBI Request, dated 12 Jul 01.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 15 Jun 01.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Jun 01.








                                    JOSEPH A. ROJ
                                    Panel Chair


Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0103469

    Original file (0103469.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    As of this date, this office has received no response. We agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility that his separation code should remain the same since he did in fact, voluntarily request discharge for the good of the service. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable material error or...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00704

    Original file (BC-2005-00704.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    They also noted applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing and provided no other facts warranting a change to his character of service. A complete copy of the 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 25 Mar 05 for review and comment within 30 days. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03151

    Original file (BC-2002-03151.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03151 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Based on his post service activities and accomplishments...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03151

    Original file (BC-2002-03151.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03151 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Based on his post service activities and accomplishments...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00509

    Original file (BC-2006-00509.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPPRS complete 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 17 Mar 06 for review and comment within 30 days and on 17 Apr 2006, he was forwarded a copy of the FBI report. Novel, Panel Chair Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member Mr. John E. B. Smith, Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Feb...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9801328

    Original file (9801328.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The discharge complied with directives in effect at the time and records indicate his military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and indicated that, while in the Air Force, he had frequent problems with the people who shared his barracks. DOUGLAS...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00921

    Original file (BC-2006-00921.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00921 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 27 SEPTEMBER 2007 __________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. __________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00367

    Original file (BC-2005-00367.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00367 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 31 AUG 2006 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 16 May 74, after consulting with counsel, applicant waived his right to a hearing before...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9900714

    Original file (9900714.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Under our broader mandate and after careful consideration of all the facts and circumstances of applicant's case, the Board is persuaded that applicant has been a productive member of society since leaving the service. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 21 Jan 60, he was discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). JOSEPH G. DIAMOND Panel...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02855

    Original file (BC-2002-02855.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02855 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). On 10 Sep 57, the discharge authority approved the Discharge for Unfitness. Having found insufficient evidence of an error or injustice with regard to the...