RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02872
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His narrative reason for discharge of drug abuse be changed.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He worked on the SR-71 and U-2 reconnaissance aircrafts and his
records are flawless.
He was wrongfully convicted and the Supreme Court overruled his
conviction and gave him an honorable discharge.
He is unable to obtain gainful employment due to the statement
on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from
Active Duty.
He had his name changed in 1992 in order to make a new life;
however, this failed due to his time in the Air Force.
In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his
DD Form 214 and name change documents.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 3 Feb 84, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force.
On 25 Apr 88, he was convicted by Special Court Martial of
wrongfully using cocaine between or about 1 Feb 86 and 31 Mar 86
and 1 Aug 87 to 31 Aug 87. He was sentenced to a bad conduct
discharge, confinement for four months, and a reduction to the
grade of airman basic.
On 28 Apr 89, the Court of Military Review set aside the
findings and sentence because of an erroneous ruling by the
military judge on admissibility of evidence. The convening
authority did not order a rehearing. All rights, privileges and
property of which the accused had been deprived by virtue of the
findings of guilty were restored.
On 9 May 89, the applicant was notified of pending discharge
action. Specifically, the commander cited drug abuse as the
basis for discharge. The applicant consulted counsel and
submitted a conditional waiver contingent upon his receipt of no
less than an honorable discharge.
On 10 May 89, the staff judge advocate ruled that the
applicants confession and witness statements would be
admissible in a discharge board. The staff judge advocate found
the case legally sufficient, concurred with the commanders
recommendation of an honorable discharge, and recommended the
discharge authority accept the applicants conditional waiver.
On 11 May 89, the discharge authority accepted the applicants
conditional waiver and directed discharge.
On 13 May 89, the applicant was separated with an honorable
discharge with a narrative reason for separation of misconduct
drug abuse. He is credited with five years, three months, and
ten days of active service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. DPSOS states the applicant did
not provide any evidence of an error or injustice to warrant the
requested change to his narrative reason for separation. The
discharge, to include his characterization of service, was
consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of
the discharge manual and was within the discretion of the
discharge authority.
The complete HQ AFPC/DPSOS 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 23 Dec 10 for review and comment within 30 days
(Exhibit D). As of this date, this office has not received a
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 error or injustice. Although the
applicants court-martial was overturned during a judicial
review, we note he was subject to an administrative discharge
based on his admitted misconduct. 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 the applicant was
not afforded all the rights to which entitled at the time of
discharge. Further, he has not provided sufficient information
of post-service activities and accomplishments for us to
conclude that his discharge should be upgraded based on
clemency. 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 the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. In
view of the above, we find no basis to warrant favorable action
on this application.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel
will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably
considered.
_________________________________________________________________
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-2010-02872 in Executive Session on 30 March 2011, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered for Docket
Number BC-2010-02872:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Jul 2007, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSOS, dated 13 Dec 10.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Dec 10.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00703
As a result, on 6 Sep 01, she was convicted by court martial for wrongful use of marijuana and wrongful introduction of marijuana onto base with the intent to distribute. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibits C and D. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSOS recommends...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-01945
In support of his request, the applicant provided a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Force of the United States, documents extracted from his military personnel records and an extract from Army Regulation (AR) 601-210. On 9 Dec 02, his commander notified him that he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for fraudulent entry. AFPC/DPSOA's complete evaluation is...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-01486
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial. The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: At the time...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00219
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00219 INDEX CODE: 110.00; 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The narrative reason for separation - “Unsuitable Apathy Defective Attitude” and the separation code of SPD-JMJ be removed from his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. The applicant was...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01317
DPSOS states that based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge, to include his characterization of service and RE code, was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. The complete HQ AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 05412
The denial letter stated, in part, at no time were you held beyond an approved retirement date due to stop-loss However, PL 111-32, § 310, in addition to covering circumstances extending service beyond an approved retirement date, states or whose eligibility for retirement was suspended pursuant to 10 U.S.C. He is only claiming retroactive stop-loss special pay compensation for the time between 11 September 2001, when the stop-loss rules went into effect, and the 12-month period of...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02165
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02165 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for separation of Personality Disorder be changed to reflect Disability. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) found him disabled...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01441
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01441 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her uncharacterized entry level separation, separation code of JFW which denotes failed medical/physical procurement standards, and reentry (RE) code of 4C (separated for concealment of juvenile records, minority, failure to meet physical standards for...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-01497
On 2 Oct 89, the applicant’s commander notified him he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for misconduct. He was discharged on 11 Oct 89. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof of the existence of either...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-01776
DPSOS states the applicant’s commander recommended his discharge from the Air Force for intentionally concealing prior service drug usage, which if revealed, could have resulted in the rejection of his enlistment. Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the applicant’s discharge, separation program designator (SPD) code and narrative reason for separation were consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within...