RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00675
INDEX CODE 110.00 110.02 100.06
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded, his
reason for separation be changed from “Misconduct – Drug Abuse” and
his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed from 2B.
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
It has been 19 years since his discharge and he has worked in
various occupations, all of which required some form of drug
screening. He has been married for 14 years and been a father. He
was rightfully discharged from the Air Force in 1983, but has
successfully stopped using [drugs] over the course of the last 19
years. He feels that after 19 years he should be given the
opportunity to show his DD Form 214 to anyone who requests it
without the label of “Drug Abuse” or “under honorable conditions,”
and to be able to show his DD Form 214 with pride.
In support of the applicant’s appeal, he provided a personal
statement and a copy of DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or
Discharge from Active Duty).
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
___________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 18 December 1979, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air
Force in the grade of airman basic. His highest grade held was
sergeant (E-4). His noncommissioned officer status (NCO) was
vacated on 7 October 1983 due to his involvement with drugs.
Applicant’s grade at time of discharge was senior airman (SrA/E-4).
On 19 December 1983, the applicant was discharged by reason of
Misconduct – Drug Abuse and issued a reenlistment eligibility (RE)
code 2B (involuntarily separated under AFR 39-10, with a general
discharge). The pertinent facts surrounding his discharge are
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the
Air Force at Exhibit C.
___________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPRS reviewed this application and recommended denial.
They stated that the commander notified the applicant on
23 November 1983, that he was being discharged for misconduct -
drug abuse, as evidenced by his positive urinalysis on
25 August 1983 and the report conducted by the Air Force Office of
Special Investigation. His commander vacated his noncommissioned
officer (NCO) status on 7 October 1983, stating that his drug
involvement did not maintain the highest standards of personal
conduct, integrity and responsibility expected of an NCO. They
found that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and
substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.
Additionally, that the discharge was within the sound discretion of
the discharge authority. They also noted that the applicant did
not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices
that occurred in the discharge processing. Accordingly, they
recommended his records remain the same and his request be denied.
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 12 April 2002 for review and comment within 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 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 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 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 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
AFBCMR Docket Number 02-00675 in Executive Session on 11 June 2002,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Panel Chair
Mr. George Franklin, Member
Mr. Charlie E. Williams Jr., Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 8 Mar 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 4 Apr 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Apr 02, w/atchs.
OLGA M. CRERAR
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01934
On 10 August 1982, he received a Letter of Reprimand for failure to report for duty at the prescribed time, 0800 hours on 9 August 1982, after a two-day leave he had taken. Therefore, he did not recommend further rehabilitation because of negative response to Letters of Reprimand and Counseling. OLGA M. CRERAR Panel Chair AFBCMR 02-01934 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01749 INDEX CODE: 112.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His separation and reenlistment eligibility (RE) codes be changed. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01749
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01749 INDEX CODE: 112.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His separation and reenlistment eligibility (RE) codes be changed. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00241 INDEX CODE 100.06 COUNSEL: American Legion HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed from 2B to 3A so that he may pursue a career in the U. S. Army. The evidence of records supports the stated reasons for the applicant's ineligibility to reenlist and we are...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03465
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC 2002-03465 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His discharge be upgraded to honorable. Since the discharge was never investigated, his discharge was wrong. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied, and...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00464
In support of his request, the applicant submits a copy of his DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States. On 20 Oct 70, the applicant received notification that he was being recommended for discharge for unfitness. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice;...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01522
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01522 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 25 January 1984, applicant waived his right to an administrative discharge board contingent upon receiving a general discharge. A general discharge was recommended...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00479
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00479 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her under honorable conditions (general) discharged be upgraded to honorable. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04057
On 16 February 1984, the applicant received notification that he was being recommended for discharge for misconduct. On 13 March 1984, the discharge authority approved the recommended separation and directed that the applicant be issued a general discharge. On 3 March 1985, the applicant applied to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) to have his RE code of 2B changed.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02695
On 21 July 1982, the applicant received a Letter of Counseling (LOC) for being late for duty. He received an RE code of 2B, “Separated with a General or Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge.” __________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial based on the applicant not submitting any new evidence nor identifying any errors or injustices that occurred during his discharge. After careful review of...