Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-03234
Original file (BC-2008-03234.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-03234
            INDEX CODE:  110.02
            COUNSEL:  None
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be  upgraded  to
honorable.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was denied promotion, reduced in rank and fined over $300 for  his  first
Article 15.  During the same time period, another airman  was  charged  with
Driving while Under the  Influence  (DUI)  of  alcohol.   However,  he  only
received a “slap on the wrist” because he and the commander  were  the  same
race.

He requested a discharge from military service  after  his  first  incident;
however, his request was not processed and he was moved around  for  another
year.

In support of his request, applicant provided a copy of  his  DD  Form  293,
Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the  United
States; his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release  or  Discharge  from  Active
Duty; certificates of  appreciation  and  awards,  and  character  reference
letters.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 2 Sep  82  in  the  grade  of
airman basic.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of  airman  having
assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 2 Mar 83.

On 23 Mar 84, the applicant was notified by his commander of his  intent  to
recommend that he be discharged from the Air Force under the  provisions  of
AFR 39-10, paragraph 5-47b, due to a pattern of misconduct.

The specific reasons for his actions were Letters of Counseling  (LOCs)  for
damaging government property and failure to go; Letters of Reprimand  (LORs)
for damaging government property and failing a dorm inspection;  Memorandums
for Record (MFRs) for  being  absent  from  scheduled  training,  delinquent
charge accounts, and being drunk on station.  He also received  two  Article
15s for disobeying a lawful order and an Article  15  for  testing  positive
for use of marijuana.

He was advised of his rights in this matter and acknowledged receipt of  the
notification on the same date.  On 3 May 84, he requested a  hearing  before
an administrative discharge board.

On 22 Jun 84, the board agreed with the findings and recommendations of  the
applicant’s commander.  In a legal review of the case  file,  the  assistant
staff judge advocate found  the  case  legally  sufficient  and  recommended
discharge.  On 30  Aug  84,  the  discharge  authority  concurred  with  the
recommendations and directed the applicant be issued  an  under  other  than
honorable  conditions  discharge  without  probation   and   rehabilitation.
Applicant was discharged on 12 Sep 84.  He served 2  years  and  11 days  on
active duty.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of  Investigation  (FBI)
provided a copy of an Investigative Report, which is at  Exhibit  C.   On  5
Jan 09, a copy of the FBI report was forwarded to the applicant  for  review
and comment within 30 days.  In  addition,  the  applicant  was  invited  to
provide post-service information (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR POST-SERVICE AND FBI REPORT:

Applicant states the FBI was  unable  to  associate  dispositions  with  the
charges because he is bipolar.  His problems occur only when his  medication
does not take affect (Exhibit E).

_________________________________________________________________

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  error  or  injustice.   We  took  notice  of  the  applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we  find  no
evidence  of  an  error  or  injustice  that  occurred  in   the   discharge
processing.  Based on the available  evidence  of  record,  it  appears  the
discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the  discharge
regulation  and  within  the  commander's  discretionary   authority.    The
applicant has provided no evidence  which  would  lead  us  to  believe  the
characterization of the service  was  contrary  to  the  provisions  of  the
governing regulation, unduly harsh,  or  disproportionate  to  the  offenses
committed.   We  considered  upgrading  the  discharge  based  on  clemency;
however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient  to  compel  us
to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis.   Therefore,  in  the
absence of evidence to  the  contrary,  we  find  no  basis  upon  which  to
recommend granting the relief sought.

________________________________________________________________

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 this application in  Executive
Session on 3 March 2009, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. James W. Russell, III, Panel Chair
      Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member
      Mr. Keith N. Eden, Member

The following  documentary  evidence  was  considered  under  AFBCMR  Docket
Number BC-2008-03234:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Sep 08, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C   FBI Report.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 21 Oct 08.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, not dated.




                                  JAMES W. RUSSELL, III
                                  Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03301

    Original file (BC-2007-03301.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-03301 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 3 Oct 78, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air...

  • 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 | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00537

    Original file (BC-2007-00537.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant entered active duty in the Air Force on 18 Jan 82. DPPRS states that based on the documentation on file in the applicant’s master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03103

    Original file (BC-2007-03103.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-03103 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NOT INDICATED HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His characterization of service be upgraded from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. We considered...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03698

    Original file (BC-2006-03698.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices during the discharge processing warranting a change in his RE code. The complete HQ AFPC/DPPAE evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 12 Jan 07 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit F). Exhibit B.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00865

    Original file (BC-2010-00865.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was discharged on 12 Oct 84. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the commander's discretionary authority. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 14 Sep 10, w/atch.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-00137

    Original file (BC-2007-00137.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He has not used marijuana or any other drug since he was discharged. (Exhibit C) ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. Based on the evidence of record, we cannot conclude that clemency is warranted.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03499

    Original file (BC-2006-03499.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03499 INDEX CODE: 106.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 17 May 08 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 1988 general discharge be upgraded to honorable. The recommendation was approved on 7 Dec 88.] Although the applicant did not specifically request consideration based on clemency, we...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00158

    Original file (BC-2008-00158.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    The commander stated the following reasons for the proposed discharge: a. On 20 November 1957, the applicant was discharged in the grade of airman basic (E-1) under the provisions of AFR 39-17, paragraph 4c, with a UOTHC service characterization. In response to our request, the applicant provided post-service information which is attached at Exhibit E. _______________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-03121

    Original file (BC-2008-03121.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 19 Jun 84, the applicant’s commander notified him he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for misconduct. c. On 19 Apr 84, he received an Article 15 for striking another airman on 7 Apr 84 and failure to go on 11 Apr 84. d. On 14 Jun 84, he received an Article 15 for wrongfully possessing marijuana. The command and base legal office reviewed the case and recommended accepting the unconditional waiver and discharge with an UOTHC discharge without probation and rehabilitation.