Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01012
Original file (BC-2005-01012.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-01012
            INDEX CODE:  110.02
      xxxxxxxxxxxxx    COUNSEL:  NONE

      xxxxxxxxxxxxxx   HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  26 AUG 2006


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He believes there was an error in the urinalysis testing.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic  on
18 October 1982, for a term of 4 years.

On 24 July 1984, the applicant's commander notified him  that  he  was
recommending he be discharged from the Air Force for misconduct.   The
basis for the commander’s recommendation was that on 29 February 1984,
he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for wrongful use  of  cocaine;
on 26 March 1984, he received a LOR for  misuse  of  another  military
member’s identification card and  on  22  May  1984,  he  received  an
Article 15 for being disorderly on station.

He acknowledged receipt of the notification of  discharge,  and  after
consulting with counsel submitted statements in his own  behalf.   The
discharge case was reviewed by the base legal office and found  to  be
legally sufficient to support discharge.

The discharge authority approved his separation and ordered a  general
(under honorable conditions) discharge  without  P&R.   Applicant  was
separated  on  24  July  1984,  under  the  provisions   of AFR 39-10,
Administrative Separation of Airmen for  (Misconduct-Drug  Abuse)  and
received  a  general  (under  honorable  conditions)  discharge.   The
applicant served one year, eight months and seven days on active duty.

Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of  Investigation,
Clarksburg, WV, provided a copy of an Investigation Report  pertaining
to the applicant, which is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states 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,
nor did he provide any facts warranting a change to his DD Form 214.

The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

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

A copy of the FBI investigative report was forwarded to the  applicant
on 29 Jun 05, for review and comment within 14 days.  As of this date,
this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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  to  warrant  changing  his
discharge.  After careful consideration of the available evidence,  we
found no indication that the actions taken  to  affect  his  discharge
were  improper  or  contrary  to  the  provisions  of  the   governing
regulations in effect at the time, or that the actions  taken  against
the applicant were based on factors other  than  his  own  misconduct.
Therefore, we agree with the opinion and  recommendation  of  the  Air
Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as  the
basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of
an error or injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence  to  the
contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief
sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

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-2005-
01012 in Executive Session on 19 July 2005, under  the  provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. John B. Hennessey, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Richard K. Hartley, Member
                 Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 Mar 05.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 12 May 05.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 May 05.
      Exhibit E. FBI Report, dated 14 Jun 05.
      Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Jun 05.





      JOHN B. HENNESSEY
      Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01461

    Original file (BC-2005-01461.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPPRS states 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, nor did he provide any facts warranting a change to his character of service. Therefore, based on the available...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01966

    Original file (BC-2005-01966.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 15 October 1984, the Air Force Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for upgrade of his discharge and concluded the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and that the applicant was provided full due process. However, after thorough review of the evidence of record, it is our opinion that the comments of the Air Force office of primary responsibility are supported by the evidence of record. We...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00463

    Original file (BC-2005-00463.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00463 INDEX CODE: 110.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 13 August 2006 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01278

    Original file (BC-2005-01278.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He began to look for means to support his addiction for which he was convicted. Civilian court conviction consisted of confinement from 21 Feb 56 – 17 Mar 56 (36 days). On 10 Sep 69, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied applicant’s request to have his discharge upgraded and for a waiver to permit reenlistment.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01556

    Original file (BC-2005-01556.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01556 INDEX NUMBER: 110.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: No MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 9 Nov 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Under Honorable Conditions (general) discharge from the Air Force be upgraded to honorable. Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01354

    Original file (BC-2004-01354.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant submitted an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (DRB) requesting his general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. 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 DPPPE evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03316

    Original file (BC-2005-03316.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005- 03316 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 01 MAY 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His uncharacterized entry level separation be changed to an honorable discharge. The discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01256

    Original file (BC-2005-01256.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement. On 3 November 1989, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen, (alcohol abuse rehabilitation failure) and received a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03254

    Original file (BC-2005-03254.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his request, the applicant submitted a personal statement, a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, and DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States. His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. The applicant requests his RE code be changed to allow enlistment in the Air National Guard.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00585

    Original file (BC-2005-00585.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005- 00585 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 21 AUGUST 2006 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The applicant offered a conditional waiver of the rights associated with an administrative discharge...