RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02875
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to
honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The circumstances surrounding his discharge did not warrant a general
discharge. He never received a letter of reprimand nor an Article 15.
He was not a problem airman with the military at all, but made a huge
mistake that altered his life.
In support of the request, he submits a copy of DD Form 214, and a
letter of support from his brother.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic on
14 January 1998. On 29 October 2002, the applicant was discharged
under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of
Airmen (misconduct), with service characterized as general (under
honorable conditions) in the grade of airman first class. He served 4
years, 9 month and 16 days of total active military service.
On 18 October 2002, applicant's commander recommended discharge due to
drug abuse. Between 1 July 2002 and 1 August 2002, the member
wrongfully used marijuana and also wrongfully possessed less than one
gram of marijuana on 20 August 2002. He received an Article 15 with a
reduction to the grade of airman first class.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRSP recommended denial and stated based upon the documentation
in the file, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and
substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. Additional, 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. He provided
no other facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge. Accordingly,
they recommends his records remain the same and his request be denied.
AFPC/DPPRSP complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 20 November 2003, 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, the Board excused
the failure to timely file.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of an error or injustice warranting an upgrade in his
discharge. The records reflect that the commander initiated
administrative actions based on information he determined to be
reliable and the administrative actions were properly accomplished.
The applicant was afforded all rights granted by statute and
regulation. We are not persuaded by the evidence presented that the
commander abused his discretionary authority when he initiated the
discharge action, and since we find no abuse of that authority, we
find no reason to overturn the commander’s decision. We agree with
the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force and adopt their
rationale as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed
to sustain his burden of having suffered either an error or an
injustice. Therefore, in absence of evidence to the contrary, we find
no 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 a 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-2003-
02875 in Executive Session on 20 January 2004, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Robert S. Boyd, Panel Chair
Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member
Ms. Carolyn B. Willis, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 23 Jul 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRSP, dated 20 Nov 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Dec 03.
ROBERT S. BOYD
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03707
The applicant was afforded all rights granted by statute and regulation and we find no evidence that the commander abused his discretionary authority when he initiated the discharge action. Applicant has provided no evidence showing that her separation was in error or unjust, therefore, we conclude that no basis exists to grant favorable action on her request. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03242
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He has been afflicted with the disease of alcoholism and substance abuse since he was 14 years old. On 20 April, 13 May, and 14 September, the member wrongfully possessed marijuana and received three letters of reprimand. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his discharge should be upgraded to honorable.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03732
In a legal review of the discharge case file dated 3 May 1985, an assistant staff judge advocate assigned to the staff of the group commander found the file legally sufficient and recommended that the case be forwarded to the discharge authority with a recommendation that the applicant not be retained but that he be discharged with a general discharge. On 9 May 1985, the group commander recommended that the discharge authority approve the recommendation for separation and accept the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01694
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01694 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for separation, separation code and reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to allow eligibility to join the Army National Guard. On 29 August 1984, the applicant received notification that he was being...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03202
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03202 INDEX CODE: A67.70 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 9 Sep 88, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Misconduct – Drug Abuse) and furnished a general discharge. As of this date, no response has...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03673
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03673 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. While the evidence provided indicates that the applicant has made a successful post-service adjustment, and notwithstanding his otherwise good service record, in...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02875
On 16 Sep 82, the applicant was notified by the Director, Personnel/Administrative Services, that he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for misconduct (specifically for drug abuse). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicants military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibits C and D. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03182
He was honorably discharged on 6 August 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Completion of Required Active Service) and was assigned an RE code of 4E (i.e., Grade is airman first class or below and airman completed 31 or more months). His assigned RE code of 4E accurately reflects that he was an airman first class who completed more than 31 months of service at the time of his separation. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03603
On 2 Nov 95, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend discharge for a pattern of misconduct. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01674
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01674 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her narrative reason for separation and Separation Program Designator (SPD) code be changed from “Pregnancy” to “Medically Disqualified not for Cause.” _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT...