RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01022
INDEX CODE: 110.00
.
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 16 SEPTEMBER 2008
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to
honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was under the impression that after six months your discharge was
upgraded.
The Board should consider his application because he is still aiming high.
In support of his appeal, applicant provides various documents pertaining
to his discharge.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 27 Apr 00, in the grade of
airman basic, for a period of six years.
On 16 Nov 01, applicant received an Article 15 for wrongful use of
marijuana. Punishment consisted of reduction in grade to airman basic.
On 6 Dec 01, the squadron commander notified the applicant that he was
recommending he be discharged from the Air Force for misconduct,
specifically drug abuse. The commander was recommending the applicant
receive an under honorable conditions (general) discharge based on an
Article 15 he received for wrongful use of marijuana.
Applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge and
submitted statements in his own behalf. The Staff Judge Advocate reviewed
the case file and found it legally sufficient to support discharge and
recommended an under honorable conditions (general) discharge without
probation and rehabilitation. The discharge authority approved the
separation and directed an under honorable conditions (general) discharge
without probation and rehabilitation.
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). He was credited
with 1 year, 7 months, and 25 days of active military service.
On 8 Apr 03, applicant applied to the Air Force Discharge Review Board
(AFDRB) requesting his discharge be upgraded to honorable. After review of
the evidence of record, the AFDRB concluded that no change in his discharge
was warranted.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied, and states, in part,
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.
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 under honorable conditions (general) discharge.
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 4 May
07 for review and comment within 30 days. To date, a response has not been
received.
_________________________________________________________________
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. We find no impropriety in the characterization of applicant's
discharge. It appears that responsible officials applied appropriate
standards in effecting the separation, and we do not find persuasive
evidence that pertinent regulations were violated or that applicant was not
afforded all the rights to which entitled at the time of discharge. We
conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and
characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing
circumstances. We also find insufficient evidence to warrant a
recommendation that the discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency.
The applicant has not provided sufficient information of post-service
activities and accomplishments for us to conclude that his discharge should
be upgraded based on clemency. Should applicant provide statements from
community leaders and acquaintances attesting to applicant's good character
and reputation and other evidence of successful post-service
rehabilitation, this Board will reconsider this case based on the new
evidence. We cannot, however, recommend approval based on the current
evidence of record. In view of the above we find no basis to warrant
favorable action on 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-2007-
01022 in Executive Session on 28 June 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Ms. B.J. 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 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 Mar 07, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 11 Apr 07.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 May 07.
B.J. WHITE-OLSON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00852
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00852 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 23 SEP 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 30 April...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00090
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00090 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 14 JUL 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge and his reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to allow reentry into the military. As of...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00808
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00808 INDEX CODE: 100.06 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 16 SEPTEMBER 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed from 2C to 4C. On 23 Feb 07, applicant received an uncharacterized entry-level separation, by reason of “Personality Disorder,” and...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00923
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00923 INDEX CODE: 100.06, 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 26 SEPTEMBER 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed so that he can join the Air National Guard. On 28 Jan 93, the applicant failed to maintain his body fat at or below the...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00455
Additionally, the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing, and he provided no facts warranting change to his under honorable conditions (general) discharge The complete DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In his letter dated 1 Apr 07, the applicant requested an extension in order to reply to the Air Force...
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 | CY2005 | BC-2005-01745
The administrative discharge board convened on 26 April 2001 and recommended applicant receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge without probation and rehabilitation. The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant’s request for upgrade of discharge to honorable and change of reason for discharge on 10 January 2002 (Exhibit B). On 27 June 2002, the Air Force Discharge Review Board again considered all the evidence of record and concluded that the overall...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01101
The applicant has not shown the characterization of his discharge was contrary to the provisions of AFR 39-10. Attached at Exhibit D is a memorandum prepared by the Air Force Review Boards Agency Legal Advisor addressing the issue of characterization of service and how standards have changed since 1959. Based on the evidence of record, we cannot conclude that clemency is warranted.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01862
________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The decision by the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to deny his request to upgrade his discharge to honorable was unjust. A legal review of the discharge case file by the staff judge advocate found the file legally sufficient and recommended the applicant be discharged with a general discharge without the opportunity for probation and rehabilitation. We took notice of the applicant's complete...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01099
The applicant has not shown the characterization of his discharge was contrary to the provisions of AFR 39-10. Based on the evidence of record, we cannot conclude that clemency is warranted. _________________________________________________________________ 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...