Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00933
Original file (BC-2005-00933.doc) Auto-classification: Approved



                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-00933
            INDEX CODE: 106.00
            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED:  Yes

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  19 Sep 06

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His 1985 general discharge be upgraded to honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The night before going on temporary duty (TDY),  he  and  a  group  of
others tried smoking marijuana.  He had an  argument  with  the  First
Sergeant’s secretary, whom he was dating.   She  was  responsible  for
pulling the names for drug testing.  The next day, he and an  enlisted
member who helped him move out of her apartment the night of the party
were called for urine samples.  This  was  the  only  time  he  smoked
marijuana and he never did drugs.  This is the only  bad  mark  on  an
otherwise honorable life and he does not wish to carry it any longer.

The applicant provides character references from an employer, a  local
sheriff, and a friend.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is  at  Exhibit
A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 30 Jan 81  for  six
years and was sequentially promoted to  the  grade  of  senior  airman
[sergeant] on 1 Mar  83.   During  the  period  in  question,  he  was
assigned to the 1836 Engineering Installation  Group  at  Lindsey  AS,
Germany, as an electronics installation team member.  His  performance
reports are at Exhibit B.

On 24 Sep 85, the applicant was notified of his commander's intent  to
impose nonjudicial punishment upon him for using marijuana on or about
29 Jul 85 [the applicant’s random urine sample tested positive for the
drug on that date, apparently while he was TDY at Offutt AFB].  On  27
Sep 85, after consulting with counsel, the applicant waived his  right
to a trial by court-martial, requested a personal appearance  but  did
not submit a written presentation.  On 27 Sep 85, his commander  found
him guilty and imposed punishment in the  form  of  reduction  to  the
grade of airman first class and forfeiture  of  $175.00  pay  for  one
month.  The applicant did not appeal the punishment, and  the  Article
15 was filed in his Unfavorable Information File (UIF).

On 6 Nov 85, he was notified of his commander’s  intent  to  recommend
separation with  a  general  characterization  for  drug  abuse.   The
commander cited the positive urine sample and  the  Article  15.   The
applicant acknowledged receipt.

On 6 Nov 85, the commander recommended the applicant be separated with
a general discharge for drug abuse.  The  letter  indicated  that  the
applicant was denied the Air Force Good Conduct Medal (AFGCM) for  the
periods of 14 Dec 82 through 20 Jun 83 and 20 Jun 83 through 11 Sep 85
[no  further  information  is  available].   The  commander  did   not
recommend probation and rehabilitation (P&R), indicating the applicant
demonstrated an inability to accept, set, and maintain  the  standards
required of him as an NCO.

On 7 Nov 85, the area defense counsel (ADC) indicated he had counseled
the applicant as to his rights.  The applicant indicated  he  did  not
desire retention in the Air Force and would not submit  statements  in
his behalf.

Legal review [undated] found the case sufficient  for  separation  and
recommended a general  discharge  without  P&R.   On  12 Dec  85,  the
discharge authority directed the  applicant’s  general  discharge  for
drug abuse without P&R.

On  17 Dec  1985,  the  applicant  was  discharged  with   a   general
characterization in the grade of airman first  class  for  Misconduct-
Drug Abuse after 4 years, 10 months, and 18 days of active service.

Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of  Investigation,
Washington, D.C., indicated that, on the basis of the data  furnished,
they were unable to locate an arrest record (Exhibit C).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ  AFPC/DPPRS  concludes  the  discharge  was  consistent  with   the
procedural and substantive requirements of  the  discharge  regulation
and was  within  the  discretion  of  the  discharge  authority.   The
applicant  has  provided  no  evidence  warranting  a  change  in  his
discharge characterization.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 15 Apr 05 for review and comment within 30 days.   As  of
this date, this office has received no response.

On 3 May 05, the AFBCMR Staff invited the applicant  to  submit  post-
service information.

The Scioto County Veterans Service Office in  OH  forwarded  a  letter
from the applicant containing his personnel  statement  regarding  his
post-service activities.  He attributes his mistakes in  the  military
to bad judgment.  He asserts he has become a productive  citizen,  has
been  employed  by  the  Southern  OH  Correctional  Facility  Maximum
Security Prison from 1990 to present,  and  is  a  member  of  several
organizations.

A complete copy of the response, with attachments, is at Exhibit G.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.    The applicant has exhausted all remedies  provided  by  existing
law or regulations.

2.    The application was timely filed.

3.    Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate
the  existence  of  error  or  injustice  to  warrant  upgrading   the
applicant’s discharge.  After a thorough review  of  the  evidence  of
record, we see no evidence  to  show  the  applicant’s  discharge  was
erroneous or unjust. However, we recognize the adverse impact  of  the
discharge  the  applicant  received  and,  while  it  may  have   been
appropriate at the time, we believe it would be an injustice  for  him
to continue to suffer its effects. In consideration of the applicant’s
apparent rehabilitation since his separation from the Air  Force,  his
character  references,  and  the  negative  FBI  report,  we   believe
corrective  action  is  appropriate  on   the   basis   of   clemency.
Accordingly, we recommend the  applicant’s  records  be  corrected  as
indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show  that,  on  17 December
1985, he was honorably discharged and furnished an Honorable Discharge
certificate.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 16 June 2005 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Ms. Martha J. Evans, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member
                 Mr. Jay H. Jordan, Member

All members  voted  to  correct  the  records,  as  recommended.   The
following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR  Docket  Number  BC-
2005-00933 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Mar 05, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  FBI Report - Negative
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 8 Apr 05.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Apr 05.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 3 May 05.
   Exhibit G.  Letter, OH Local VA, dated 18 May 05, w/atchs.




                                   MARTHA J. EVANS
                                   Panel Chair

AFBCMR BC-2005-00933




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, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is
directed that:

      The pertinent military records of  the  Department  of  the  Air
Force relating to     , be corrected  to  show  that,  on  17 December
1985, he was honorably discharged and furnished an Honorable Discharge
certificate.






   JOE G. LINEBERGER

   Director

   Air Force Review Boards Agency


Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01296

    Original file (BC-2005-01296.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The commander indicated in his recommendation for discharge action that before recommending the discharge, the applicant was counseled formally by the squadron staff and social actions personnel. On 10 May 2005, the Board staff requested the applicant provide post- service documentation within 20 days (Exhibit F). Although the applicant did not specifically request consideration based on clemency, we also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the discharge be upgraded...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03041

    Original file (BC-2007-03041.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 23 Apr 84, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for failure in Drug Abuse Rehabilitation. On 24 Jun 83, he was entered into the drug rehabilitation program because his urine sample he submitted on 21 Apr 83 tested positive for marijuana. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. On 1 Nov 07, the Board staff forwarded the applicant a copy...

  • AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD00-00040

    Original file (FD00-00040.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ATR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD ‘NAME OF SERVICE MEMRAER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) ~ PERSONAL APPEARANCE AIC GRADE AYSN/S84N X RECORD REVIEW NAME GF COUNSEL AND OK ORGANZA THOM ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION GF COLINSEL — M EMBERS SITTING HON GEN OTHC OTHER DENY at peer “INDEX NUMBER“ "" ERE PRIBIIS SUUMIFTED TO THE BOAR AQLS7 A66.00 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE LETTER OF NOTIFICATION HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER GRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE ae et 23...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02793

    Original file (BC-2004-02793.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 | CY2003 | BC-2002-03329

    Original file (BC-2002-03329.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The following information was extracted from the applicant’s submission, his military records, and the Air Force Office of Special Investigation (AFOSI) Report of Investigation (ROI) dated 21 May 02. He denied using controlled substances and, after further questioning, requested legal counsel. Because there is no evidence before us that the EPR would have been different without the first specification in...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01836

    Original file (BC-2003-01836.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 30 Aug 85, the applicant offered a conditional waiver of his right to an administrative discharge board contingent upon his receiving no less than a general discharge. Exhibit C. FBI Report - No Arrest Record Exhibit D. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 1 Jul 03. Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 30 Jul 03.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02504

    Original file (BC-2006-02504.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02504 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 17 FEBRUARY 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. Applicant was discharged on 24 Apr 85, in the grade of staff sergeant, under the provisions of AFR 39-10,...

  • AF | DRB | CY2007 | FD2005-00353

    Original file (FD2005-00353.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. I go through this lengthy explanation about the medication for several reasons, One of the reasons is to point out that it took some time to locate a testing facility; there was some confusion about retention...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01329_2nd_Board

    The applicant’s squadron commander made the recommendation to the Air Wing commander. On 13 October 2000, her commander notified her of his intent to impose NJP and to discharge her from the NYANG for violating NY State law by wrongfully using THC, a controlled substance. Counsel’s complete response is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant contends the cutoff level for determining a...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01329

    Original file (BC-2005-01329.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s squadron commander made the recommendation to the Air Wing commander. On 13 October 2000, her commander notified her of his intent to impose NJP and to discharge her from the NYANG for violating NY State law by wrongfully using THC, a controlled substance. Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant contends the cutoff level for determining a...