Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02024
Original file (BC-2003-02024.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

                            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.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He should have a honorable discharge.  He was told by  the  Air  Force
that his discharge would be upgraded to honorable in six months.

Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 2 October  1984  for  a
period of four (4) years as an airman first class.

On 23 September 1985, the applicant was notified  of  his  commander’s
intent to initiate discharge action against him under  the  provisions
of AFR 39-10, paragraph 5-49c-Misconduct-Drug  Abuse.   The  commander
recommended a general (under  honorable  conditions)  discharge.   The
reason for the discharge action was:

      On 19 July 1985, at Rhein Mein AB, Germany,  the  applicant  was
directed to submit to a urinalysis during a random unit sweep.   On  6
August 1985, the applicant’s urinalysis tested positive for marijuana.

The commander advised the applicant of his right  to  consult  legal
counsel and that military legal counsel had been obtained  for  him;
and to submit statements in his  own  behalf;  or  waive  the  above
rights after consulting with counsel.

On 9 October 1985, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the  letter
of notification and invoked his right to submit  statements  on  his
behalf.

The commander indicated in his recommendation for discharge that  he
did not recommend probation and rehabilitation.   He  indicated  the
applicant had been verbally counseled numerous times  on  Air  Force
policy toward drug use prior to the incident.

A legal review was conducted on 28 October 1985, in  which  the  staff
judge advocate recommended the applicant be discharged with a  general
(under  honorable  conditions)   discharge   without   probation   and
rehabilitation.

On 1 November 1985, the discharge authority approved the discharge.

Applicant was discharged on 15 November 1985, in the grade of airman
with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge, in accordance
 with  AFR 39-10 (Misconduct - Drug Abuse).  He  served  1  year,  1
month and 14 days of active service.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report which is  attached
at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS states the applicant has not  submitted  any  evidence  nor
identified any errors or injustices that occurred in the processing of
his discharge.  Based upon the documentation in the applicant's  file,
they believe his discharge was  consistent  with  the  procedural  and
substantive requirements of the discharge regulations  of  that  time.
Also, the discharge was within the sound discretion of  the  discharge
authority.  Therefore, based on the information and evidence  provided
they recommend the applicant's request be denied.

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In support of his request to have his discharge upgraded the applicant
submitted character letters from his brother and employer (Exhibit H).

_________________________________________________________________

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 of timely file.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice.  After thoroughly  reviewing  the
evidence or record, we find no evidence to show that  the  applicant’s
discharge was erroneous or unjust.  The applicant’s contention that he
was told his discharge would automatically be upgraded after 6  months
is duly noted.  However, as noted by the Air Force office  of  primary
responsibility, there are no regulations or directives that  allow  an
automatic upgrade of a discharge.  We have  considered  the  character
references provided in support of the  applicant’s  request;  however,
the FBI report shows that the applicant was arrested and charged  with
several offenses since his separation from active duty.   In  view  of
the foregoing, we are not persuaded that an upgrade on  the  basis  of
clemency is warranted.  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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2003-02024 in Executive  Session  on  23  September  2003,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. John L. Robuck, Panel Chair
                       Mr. James W. Russell III, Member
                       Mr. Jay H. Jordan, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 Jun 03.
   Exhibit B.  Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  FBI Report
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 11 Jul 03.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jul 03.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 13 Aug 03, w/atch.
   Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 27 Aug 03, w/atch.
   Exhibit H.  Character/Reference Letters, dated 4 & 5 Sep 03.





                             JOHN L. ROBUCK

                                        Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0102024

    Original file (0102024.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02024 INDEX CODE: A79.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, WV, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. The remaining...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01125

    Original file (BC-2003-01125.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evaluation officer recommended the applicant receive a general discharge and not be considered for rehabilitation. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of investigation, Washington, D.C., indicated on the basis of the data furnished they were unable to locate an arrest record which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS states the applicant has not submitted any evidence nor identified...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02035

    Original file (BC-2003-02035.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, WV, provided a copy of an Investigation Report pertaining to the applicant, which is at Exhibit G. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS states that due to the lack of documentation to support the applicant’s discharge process, his young age at the time, and considering the incident occurred over 45 years ago, they would not be opposed to the Board...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03949

    Original file (BC-2002-03949.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 28 Feb 03. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Mar 03.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02795

    Original file (BC-2002-02795.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The commander indicated in his recommendation for discharge action that considering the member’s character of service he did not consider the urinalysis submitted on 12 March 1986, but based his recommendation that he receive a general discharge on his overall military record during his current enlistment. On 19 September 1986, the Administrative Discharge Board recommended the applicant be discharged for minor disciplinary infractions and commission of a serious offense, to wit: drug...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02156

    Original file (BC-2003-02156.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02156 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). From 29 August 1952 to 24 September 1952, he was confined in civilian jail. The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01232

    Original file (BC-2004-01232.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01232 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: DAV HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dtd 11 May 04. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dtd 14 May 04.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01596

    Original file (BC-2005-01596.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was informed at the time of his discharge that six months subsequent his discharge he would be able to upgrade his character of service from general to honorable. The commander indicated in his recommendation for discharge action that he did not recommend the applicant for rehabilitation or probation. The applicant provided a response, which is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01484

    Original file (BC-2003-01484.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01484 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: Disabled American Veterans HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03782

    Original file (BC-2006-03782.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03782 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 16 JUN 08 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit F. On 1 February 2007, a copy of the...