RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03949
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
\ HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be changed
to a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His honorable service was not taken into account and his discharge was
based on an isolated incident. He successfully completed a drug
rehabilitation program prior to being discharged. From 2000 through
2002 he worked with the local police and personally changed the lives
of three troubled youths. These three (3) youths are drug-free today
due in large part to his involvement and support. He is presently
seeking employment with Homeland Security and the local Corrections
Department.
In support of his request, the applicant submits a personal statement,
a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from
Active Duty, 3 letters of support from former supervisors, a copy of
Gunsmoke award from 1985, a letter of recommendation from his former
Officer in Charge and 10 letters of achievement.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic on
17 June 1982 for a term of 4 years. On 11 December 1985, the
applicant requested that he be discharged in lieu of trial by court-
martial. Court-martial charges were referred against applicant on 13
December 1985.
The security police investigated him after he was accused by another
airman of using marijuana and methamphetamine. A urinalysis tested
positive and applicant admitted to using illicit drugs numerous times.
Investigation revealed applicant had used marijuana on divers
occasions from 1 April to 30 April 1985, and used
methamphetamines on divers occasions from 1 August 19984 to 1 April
1985. After charges were referred and he consulted with counsel, he
requested discharge in lieu of court-martial. His commanders and the
legal authorities recommended approval of the discharge with a UOTHC
characterization, primarily because he cooperated with other drug
investigations that resulted in prosecutions. The discharge package
was reviewed by the acting staff judge advocate and the deputy staff
judge advocate and found to be legally sufficient and recommended
approval with a UOTHC discharge without probation and rehabilitation.
On 27 January 1986, the approving authority approved his discharge and
he was discharged on 18 February 1986, under the provisions of AFR 39-
10, Chapter 4, pursuant to his request for discharge in lieu of trial
by court-martial. He was issued a UOTHC discharge. The applicant
served three (3) years and eight (8) months on active duty.
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Clarksburg, WV, indicated on 11 April 2003, that, on the basis of data
furnished, they are unable to locate an arrest record.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial. The discharge was consistent with the
procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation
and the separation was within the 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 a change in his
discharge. Accordingly, we recommend his records remain the same and
his request be denied.
The DPPRS 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 7
Mar 03, for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, this
office has received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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 an error or injustice in regard to his request that
his discharge characterization be changed. After a thorough review of
the documentation provided in support of his appeal and the evidence
of record, it is our opinion that given the circumstances surrounding
his separation from the Air Force, the discharge given to the
applicant was proper and in compliance with the appropriate
directives. Applicant has not provided any new evidence, which would
lead us to believe otherwise. Therefore, in the absence of evidence
to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend a change in
his discharge characterization.
_________________________________________________________________
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 Docket Number BC-2002-
03949 in Executive Session on 20 May 2003, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
Mr. John L. Robuck, Panel Chair
Mr. Billy C. Baxter, Member
Mr. Kenneth Dumm, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 Nov 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 28 Feb 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Mar 03.
JOHN L. ROBUCK
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02024
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02024 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. He was told by the Air Force that his discharge would be upgraded to honorable in six months. Therefore, based on the information and evidence provided they recommend...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01216
On 19 December 2000, the discharge authority’s staff judge advocate recommended approval of the applicant’s request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial and that the applicant be discharged with a UOTHC characterization of service. It is also JA’s opinion that the applicant should not be allowed to use his discharge request to halt the court-martial process established by law as the proper means to adjudicate the criminal allegations against him and now, under the guise of an...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00724
On 5 January 1989, the Air Force Discharge Review Board considered and denied applicant’s request for an upgrade of discharge and change of reason for separation. After a thorough review of the documentation provided in support of his appeal and the evidence of record, it is our opinion that given the circumstances surrounding his separation from the Air Force, the discharge was proper and in compliance with the appropriate directives. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02884
Additionally, his commanders recommended a UOTHC discharge. The applicant, while serving in the grade of sergeant, was discharged from the Air Force on 23 April 1992 under the provisions of AFR 39-10 (Request for Discharge in Lieu of Court-Martial) with an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge. The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of discharge on 25 January 1996.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03012
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03012 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. Although the pathology report of removed tissues were consistent with Crohn’s Disease, medical records between the time of his August 1985 hospital discharge and his...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03012
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03012 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. Although the pathology report of removed tissues were consistent with Crohn’s Disease, medical records between the time of his August 1985 hospital discharge and his...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00030
On 17 April 1972, the applicant’s commander forwarded the request to the group commander, recommending approval of the applicant’s request for discharge. He had served 1 year, 6 months and 17 days on active duty. The applicant has provided no evidence indicating the information in the discharge case file was erroneous, his substantial rights were violated, or that his commanders abused their discretionary authority.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03376
On 11 Dec 59 and 18 Oct 78, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request that his discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00404
The applicant acknowledged he could receive an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge but, based on his almost 19 years of service, requested he be considered for a general discharge. On 11 August 1989, the Major Air Command Director of General Law found the file legally sufficient and recommended lengthy service probation be denied. On 16 October 1989, the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions in the grade of technical sergeant by reason of...
The remaining 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 at Exhibit C. On 11 February 1988, the Air Force Discharge Review Board reviewed and denied applicant’s request that his discharge be upgraded to honorable. DPPRS states that based upon the documentation in the file, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the...