RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01296
INDEX CODE: 110.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 20 OCTOBER 2006
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an
honorable discharge.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His misconduct while in the Air Force was a one-time offense and he has
since matured. He has no other blemishes on his record and while in the
service his overall ratings on his airman performance reports (APRs)
reflected ratings of 9.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 6 April 1982, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force in the
grade of airman basic for a period of four years.
On 3 March 1986, the applicant was notified of his commander's intent to
initiate discharge action against him for Commission of a Serious Offense.
The specific reasons follow:
a. Memorandum for Record, dated 23 December 1985, by the first
sergeant documenting his random selection to provide the clinic with a
urine sample.
b. Results of Drug Urinalysis Testing, dated 11 February 1986, from
the base drug abuse monitor, indicated the urine sample the applicant
provided on 23 December 1985 tested positive for THC (tetrahydrocannabinol
- active component in marijuana).
c. AF Form 2731, dated 12 February 1986, notification of drug
abuse, wherein he was referred to social actions for evaluation in the drug
abuse rehabilitation program.
d. AF Form 3070, dated 21 February 1986, nonjudicial punishment by
the commander for violating Article 112a, Uniform Code of Military Justice
(UCMJ), by wrongfully using marijuana. He was reduced in grade to airman
first class, ordered to forfeit $100.00, and ordered to perform 30 days of
extra duty. His marijuana use was discovered after random urinalysis
testing indicated THC content.
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. He further indicated he
did not recommend probation and rehabilitation according to chapter 7. The
applicant’s actions had proven him unfit for further military service.
The commander advised the applicant of his right to consult legal counsel,
to submit statements in his own behalf, or waive his rights after
consulting with counsel.
After consulting with counsel, the applicant waived his right to submit
statements in his own behalf.
The Staff Judge Advocate recommended the applicant be discharged from the
Air Force for misconduct, drug abuse, with a general discharge certificate,
without probation and rehabilitation.
On 5 March 1986, the discharge authority approved the applicant’s general
discharge.
The applicant was discharged on 6 March 1986, in the grade of airman first
class with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge, under the
provisions of AFR 39-10 (Misconduct - Drug Abuse). He served 3 years, 11
months, and 1 day of total active military service.
Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Clarksburg, West Virginia, was unable to identify with arrest record on the
basis of information furnished Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRS recommended denial indicating 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 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.
The evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 29 April 2005, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant for review and response within 30 days. As of this date, no
response has been received by this office.
On 10 May 2005, the Board staff requested the applicant provide post-
service documentation within 20 days (Exhibit F). 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. The Board took notice of the
applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however,
the Board agrees with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force and
adopts its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has
not been the victim of an error or injustice. The applicant has failed to
demonstrate the commander exceeded his authority or the reason for the
discharge was inaccurate or unwarranted. Absent evidence to the contrary,
the Board presumes responsible officials applied appropriate standards in
effecting the separation, and the Board does not find persuasive evidence
that pertinent regulations were violated or the applicant was not afforded
all the rights to which entitled at the time of discharge. Therefore, we
find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.
4. 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 on that basis.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the
existence of an error or an injustice; the application was denied without a
personal appearance; and 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2005-
01296 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
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 13 April 2005.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Negative FBI Report.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 28 April 2005.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 April 2005.
Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 10 May 2005, w/atch.
MARTHA J. EVANS
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00933
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. On 6 Nov 85, the commander recommended the applicant be separated with a general discharge for drug abuse. Accordingly, we recommend...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01154
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 27 October 1982 for a period of four years. The discharge authority approved the separation and directed that applicant be discharged with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant’s request for upgrade of discharge to honorable and change of reason for discharge on 4 November 1987 (Exhibit B).
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 | 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
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03313
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03313 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 26 APRIL 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. Additionally, the applicant provided no facts warranting a change to her under other than honorable...
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...
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Senior Attorney-Advisor, HQ AFPC/JA, also reviewed the application and states it is unfortunately true that Air Force Drug Testing Labs have at times experienced lapses in following the proper processes while testing urine samples. The applicant's urine sample prior to his discharge was tested twice and both times tested positive for marijuana. Based on the evidence submitted that office recommends denying...
Applicant submitted a similar request to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB); however, since his discharge occurred over 15 years ago, his request was returned without action and he was advised to submit his current appeal to the Board. The applicant did not submit any new evidence of identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing, and provided no facts warranting an upgrade of his discharge. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting...
His ignorance and choice of companions did not warrant a discharge for Misconduct Drug Abuse or a downgrade of an honorable discharge to a general discharge. DPPRS states the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation at the time of the applicant's discharge from active duty. DPPRS indicates that the applicant did not submit any new evidence, identify any errors in the discharge process, nor provide facts that warrant an upgrade of...