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.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was convicted based on weak circumstantial evidence. He had a military
appointed attorney whom he briefly met and spoke to him about his case for
five minutes, maybe 10. The court transcript shows that the accuser
contradicted him self and his attorney never made an attempt to attack the
credibility of the main witness (accuser)-Mr. H, whom it had recently been
proven, was a cocaine user. The accuser was being forced to create
situations for the AFOSI. This was the only way Mr. H__ was allowed to
extend or reenlist.
In support of his request, applicant provided a copy of DD Form 214.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 23 May 1980 and was
progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class. He was tried by
a special court-martial and separated with a bad conduct discharge (BCD).
He served 3 years, 4 months and 19 days of total active military service.
On 15 September 1982, he was tried by a special court-martial for
wrongfully transferring a quantity of Lysergic Acid Diethyl amide (LSD), in
violation of Article 92, UCMJ. Applicant pleaded not guilty to the charge.
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 the grade of airman basic.
On 7 November 1983, the Air Force Court of Military Review reviewed the
court-martial and affirmed the findings and sentence.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial and stated that there was no error or
injustice that occurred in the processing of this discharge action. Based
upon the documentation in file, the discharge was consistent with the
procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. The
discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority. The
applicant has not submitted any evidence or identified any errors or
injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. He provided no facts
warranting an upgrade of the discharge.
AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is attached 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, 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 that would warrant an upgrade of his
discharge. 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 he has not been the victim of an error or injustice.
Evidence has not been provided which would lead us to believe that the
action taken to affect his discharge from the Air Force was improper or
contrary to the provisions of the governing regulations at the time; or,
that the characterization of his service was based on factors other than
his own misconduct. Therefore, based on the available evidence of record,
we find no compelling basis upon which to recommend granting the relief
sought in this application.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been
shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially
add to our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request
for a hearing is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
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-2003-03809
in Executive Session on January 20, 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Robert S. Boyd, Panel Chair
Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member
Ms. Carolyn G. Willis, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Nov 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 3 Dec 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Dec 03.
ROBERT S. BOYD
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03685
The FBI provided a copy of an Investigative Report pertaining to the applicant, which is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial and states that based upon the documentation in the file the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be...
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 | 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-2003-02025
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 | 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 | CY2003 | BC-2003-01430
The evidence presented at his discharge board hearing was insufficient to establish that he knowingly used cocaine and because his counsel at the board “failed to emphasize to the panel the possibility that he may have innocently ingested cocaine without his knowledge.” AFMPC/DPMARS2 committed error by failing to give him notice of the decision to refuse his request for lengthy service probation. In view of his length of service, military record, and the board findings that he met six of...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00431
For these actions, he received an LOR, which was placed in his existing UIF. On 19 Dec 01, the applicant was discharged under provisions of AFI 36-3208 by reason of misconduct, with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). On 15 Nov 02, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) found that neither evidence of record, nor that provided by the applicant, substantiated an inequity or impropriety which would justify a change in the discharge (see AFDRB Hearing Record...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00040
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Most of the applicant’s records were destroyed in the Jul 73 fire at the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC). Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Washington, D.C., provided an investigative report, which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS provided their rationale for...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03636
The applicant, while serving in the grade of airman basic, was separated from the Air Force on 1 February 1985 by Special Court- Martial Order #1, dated 17 January 1985, with a BCD. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 14 February 2003, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. It has been...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01955
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01955 INDEX CODE: 110.00, 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 2X be changed to allow eligibility to reenlist in the Air Force. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends...