Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03707
Original file (BC-2003-03707.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-03707

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her general (under honorable  conditions)  discharge  be  upgraded  to
honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

At the time of her discharge, she was  never  convicted  of  a  crime,
never received a negative urinalysis and the allegations  against  her
was not enough to go to court.   Allegations  were  all  hearsay.  She
feels she was unjustly discharge and would like  her  records  updated
and upgraded.

In support of the request, she submits a copy of DD Form 214.

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
28 October 1985. On 18 December 1987,  the  applicant  was  discharged
under the  provisions  of  AFM  39-10  (Misconduct-Drug  Abuse),  with
service characterized as general (under honorable conditions)  in  the
grade of airman. She served 2 years, 1 month  and  20  days  of  total
active military service.

On 12 November 1987, applicant's commander recommended  discharge  due
to misconduct - drug abuse.  On 15 July 1986,  the  member  wrongfully
used marijuana and received an Article 15 with a reduction  to  airman
and 7 days correctional custody.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS  recommended  denial  and  stated  that  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.  She provided no other facts warranting an upgrade of  the
discharge.  Accordingly, they recommends his records remain  the  same
and his request be denied.

AFPC/DPPRS 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 19 December 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.  The records reflect that  the
commander initiated administrative actions  based  on  information  he
determined to be reliable.  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 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-
03707 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 28 Oct 03, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRSP, dated 26 Nov 03.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Dec 03.






      ROBERT S. BOYD
      Panel Chair



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02523

    Original file (BC-2003-02523.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02523 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable and he receive financial benefits for medical and housing. On 18 May 1987, the applicant's commander recommended he be discharged for misconduct. The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02025

    Original file (BC-2003-02025.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Included in the file was an impact statement concerning the Letter of Evaluation. In a legal review of the discharge case file dated 13 February 2003, the staff judge advocate found the file was legally sufficient and supported the recommendation that the applicant be separated from the service. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant summarized the information contained in the applicant’s personnel and medical...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03055

    Original file (BC-2002-03055.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03055 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The reason for her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be changed to reflect hardship. Basis for the action was a Letter of Counseling, in October 1987, for failure to report to duty two consecutive days; four Letters of Reprimand--30 November...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03055

    Original file (BC-2002-03055.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03055 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The reason for her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be changed to reflect hardship. Basis for the action was a Letter of Counseling, in October 1987, for failure to report to duty two consecutive days; four Letters of Reprimand--30 November...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01172

    Original file (BC-2003-01172.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01172 INDEX CODE: 112.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her narrative reason for separation and reenlistment eligibility (RE) codes be changed. She was assigned a reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2C, “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03809

    Original file (BC-2003-03809.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03809 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded in order to receive any benefits entitled. The applicant was found guilty and sentenced to a BCD, confinement at hard labor for three months, forfeiture of $367.00 per month for one month and reduction to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04053

    Original file (BC-2002-04053.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that based upon the documentation in the file, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation at the time. The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations were...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01194

    Original file (BC-2003-01194.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The former member received an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge on 7 February 1969 under the provisions of AFR 36- 12, with a Separation Designator Number (SDN) of “522”, which defined means “Resignation in Lieu of Court-Martial, Triable by Court- Martial.” He had completed a total of five years, three months and two days of active service and was serving in the grade of captain at the time of discharge. The HQ USAF/DPPRS evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03483

    Original file (BC-2002-03483.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03483 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: American Legion HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 6 April 1987, she received another Article 15 that imposed reduction in grade to Airman Basic (AB/E-1) for two additional charges...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03698

    Original file (BC-2003-03698.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    She was given the option to remain in the Air Force or separate from active duty and re-enter the Air Force at a later date. Therefore, we recommend the RE code of 2C be changed to 3A, a code for first-term, nonprior service, females who enlisted into the Air Force and “it was later discovered they were pregnant before their enlistment,” and were immediately discharged. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military...