Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200100
Original file (0200100.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-00100
            INDEX CODE:   100.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The reasons the applicant believes the  records  to  be  in  error  or
unjust and the evidence submitted in support  of  the  appeal  are  at
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from  the
applicant's military records, are contained in the letter prepared  by
the appropriate office of the Air Force (Exhibit C).

On 28 January 2001, the  Air  Force  Discharge  Review  Board  (AFDRB)
denied applicant's request to upgrade his discharge to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial.  They indicate that on 6 June 2000, the
applicant’s commander recommended he be discharged for drug  abuse  in
accordance with AFI 36-3208 and be issued a  general  discharge.   The
reason for the action was on or about 23  March  2000,  he  wrongfully
used marijuana.  An investigation by the Air Force Office  of  Special
Investigation (AFOSI) revealed he had smoked marijuana.  On  16  March
2000,  he  was  given  an  Article  15,  Nonjudicial  Punishment,  and
reduction to airman basic and forfeiture of pay.  On 9 June 2000,  the
Discharge Authority  approved  the  general  discharge.   He  was  not
eligible for probation and rehabilitation in accordance with  AFI  36-
3208, Chapter 7.

They believe 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  proceedings.
Additionally, the applicant provided no facts warranting an upgrade of
the discharge he received.  He has not filed a timely request.

The evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 1 March 2002, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was  forwarded  to
the applicant for review and response within thirty (30) days.  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 timely filed.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of probable 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
and adopt their rationale as the basis for  our  conclusion  that  the
applicant  has  not  been  the  victim  of  an  error  or   injustice.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to  the  contrary,  we  find  no
compelling basis to recommend  granting  the  relief  sought  in  this
application.

_________________________________________________________________

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 AFBCMR Docket Number 02-
00100 in Executive Session on 4 April 2002 under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:

                 Mr. Lawrence R. Leehy, Panel Chair
                 Mr. John E. B. Smith, Member
                 Mr. William Edwards, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 January 2002, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 13 February 2002.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 March 2002.





                                   LAWRENCE R. LEEHY
                                   Panel Chair



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201273

    Original file (0201273.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The commander advised the applicant that if his recommendation was approved, his discharge would be described as an uncharacterized entry-level discharge and he would be ineligible for reenlistment in the Air Force. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS states that they believe the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation at the time of his discharge from active duty. A...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201611

    Original file (0201611.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    During his enlistment he received one Airman Performance Report for the period 15 January 1973 - 22 May 1973 with an overall evaluation of five (5). Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provided a copy of an investigative report pertaining to the applicant, which is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be approved. Having found no error or injustice...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201253

    Original file (0201253.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01253 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His discharge be upgraded to honorable. 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 Staff and adopt their rationale as the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200254

    Original file (0200254.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPRS determined that based on the documentation in the applicant’s file, his discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluation were forwarded to the applicant on 28 Jun 02 for review and comment...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201254

    Original file (0201254.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    As a result, you were disenrolled from the Security Forces technical training course on 18 October 2001. However, after reviewing the applicant’s request and the evidence of record, we find the narrative reason for his entry level separation; i.e., entry level performance and conduct, to be inaccurate. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01770

    Original file (BC-2002-01770.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    ---, which is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS states that the applicant provided no facts warranting an upgrade of his discharge. Exhibit B. LAWRENCE R. LEEHY Panel Chair AFBCMR 02-01770 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201300

    Original file (0201300.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01300 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His discharge be upgraded to honorable. Considered alone, we conclude the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002833

    Original file (0002833.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02833 INDEX CODE: 110.00, 112.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reason for separation and her Separation Program designation (SPD) code be changed from JFX (Personality Disorder) to MBK (Completion of Required Service). A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200155

    Original file (0200155.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He would not have enlisted in the Air Force if not for the guarantee he received from the recruiter. On 22 June 1998, he signed a statement indicating he was a homosexual and he requested he be discharged from the Air Force for homosexual conduct. The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAE states that RE code 2C, “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service” is correct.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201803

    Original file (0201803.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    They indicated that the first time the report was considered in the promotion process was cycle 02E7 to master sergeant (promotions effective August 2002 - July 2003). The evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the evaluations and provided a response, which is at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. We...