RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-03669
COUNSEL: NONE
XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to
honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The applicant made no contentions.
In support of his application, he submits a DD Form 293, Application
for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the
United States.
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
23 July 1982. On 16 May 1985, 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. He served 2 years, 9 month and 23 days of total active
military service.
On 2 May 1985, applicant's commander recommended discharge due to
misconduct - drug abuse. The commander recommended the applicant
receive a general (under honorable conditions) discharge based on the
following: On 7 and 30 November 1984, the applicant wrongfully used
marijuana, a scheduled I controlled substance. On 23 January 1985,
applicant wrongfully used marijuana, a schedule I controlled
substance.
The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge
and after consulting with legal counsel submitted statements in his
own behalf. The base legal office reviewed the case and found it
legally sufficient to support separation and recommended applicant be
separated with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge with
probation and rehabilitation.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial and based on the documentation on file
in the master personnel records, 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 did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors
or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. He provided
no facts warranting a change to his character of service.
AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 17 December 2004, 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 and the administrative actions taken appear
to have been 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. Therefore, we agree with the opinions and recommendation of
the Air Force and adopt its 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.
In view of the above, 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-2004-
03669 in Executive Session on 8 February 2005, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:
Ms. B. J. White-Olson, Panel Chair
Mrs. Barbara R. Murray, Member
Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 8 Dec 04, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRSP, dated 15 Dec 04.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Dec 04.
B. J. WHITE-OLSON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01022
On 21 Dec 01, applicant was discharged in the grade of airman basic, under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, by reason of misconduct, with service characterized as under honorable conditions (general). On 8 Apr 03, applicant applied to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his discharge be upgraded to honorable. White-Olson, Panel Chair Ms. Mary C. Puckett, Member Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2007- 01022...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03409
On 11 September 1956, the discharge authority approved the recommendation and directed that the applicant be discharged from the service and furnished an Undesirable Discharge certificate. He had served 2 years 2 months and 9 days on active duty. B. J. WHITE-OLSON Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2004-03904 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10,...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01201
On 23 May 2005, the applicant's commander served him with an offer of nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, UCMJ, for wrongfully using marijuana. No provision contained in the Air Force enlisted discharge regulation requires the separation authority to make the special findings on the retention request, as the applicant contends. The applicant has not provided any evidence showing that the imposing commander or the reviewing authority abused their discretionary authority, that his...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02163
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02163 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. However, he has provided no evidence showing his discharge was improper or contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation at the time it was...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00676
Air Force Instruction 36-3202, Separation Documents, 20 May 94, states that item 11 of the DD Form 214 will reflect the primary AFSC code (PAFSC) and all additional AFSCs in which the member served for one year or more, during member’s continuous active military service, and for each AFSC, the title with years and months of service. The Separation Program Designation (SPD) code issued in conjunction with his 18 June 2004 release from active duty is correct; however, a majority of the Board...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02793
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02793 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded to honorable. The evidence of record reflects the applicant was discharged for drug abuse. Exhibit B.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03498
(4) On or about 23 January 1980, applicant willfully disobeyed a lawful command from a superior commissioned officer, to return to his office. A FBI Report was forwarded to the applicant on 7 January 2005 for review and response within 15 days. 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 | CY2005 | BC-2005-02007
For this, he received a Letter of Counseling. For this offense he received punishment under Article 15, consisting of a reduction in grade to airman with an effective date and date of rank of 2 Dec 98, suspended forfeiture of $200 pay per month for two months, ten days of extra, a letter of counseling and entry in his UIF. Based on documentation in the file, they found the discharge consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02816
On 30 November 1961, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge to honorable. However, as of this date, no response has been received. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicant’s complete submission, we find no evidence of error or injustice.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03674
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03674 INDEX CODE: 110.00, 112.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 3 JUN 08 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. Based on the confirmatory results, the Board should direct correction of his RE code to 3K — Reserved for use by HQ Air Force Personnel Center or the Air Force Board for...