Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03322
Original file (BC-2010-03322.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
 

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03322 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He was never informed of his rights and the period of time he’s 
had to suffer the effects of the discharge characterization is 
unjust. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force, on 
11 October 1984, in the grade of airman basic (E-1/AB) for a 
period of four years. He was progressively promoted to the 
grade of airman (E-2/Amn), with a Date of Rank (DOR) of 
11 April 1985. 

 

 a. He received an Article 15 for resisting apprehension, 
on or about 10 August 1985. His punishment consisted of 
correctional custody for 30 days and a suspended reduction to 
the grade of AB. 

 

 b. He received an Article 15 for wrongful use of 
marijuana, on or about 10 August 1985. His punishment consisted 
of a reduction to the grade of airman basic (AB). 

 

The applicant was notified by his commander that he was 
recommending him for discharge from the Air Force under the 
provisions of AFR 39-10, paragraph 5-49c, commission of a 
serious offense – drug abuse. The specific reasons for this 
action were based on the incidents listed above. 

 


Due to the applicant’s grade, time in service, and the character 
of service being recommended, he was not entitled to present his 
case before a board of officers. However, after consulting with 
counsel, the applicant submitted written statements in his own 
behalf. After a legal review of the case file, the staff judge 
advocate found the case legally sufficient and recommended the 
applicant receive a general discharge without probation and 
rehabilitation (P&R). The discharge authority approved the 
general discharge, without P&R. 

 

The applicant was discharged, on 10 December 1985, under the 
provisions of AFR 39-10, with a reason for separation of 
misconduct – drug abuse, with service characterized as general 
(under honorable conditions). He was credited with one year and 
two months of active duty service. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 during the discharge process. 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 also find 
insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the 
discharge be upgraded on the basis of clemency. We have 
considered the available evidence of record; however, based on 
the evidence of record, we cannot conclude that clemency is 
warranted. The applicant has not provided sufficient 
information of post-service activities and accomplishments for 
us to conclude that he has overcome the behavioral traits which 
caused the discharge. Should the applicant provide statements 
from community leaders and acquaintances attesting to his good 
character and reputation and other evidence of successful post-
service rehabilitation, this Board may be inclined to reconsider 
this case based on the new evidence. We cannot, however, 
recommend approval based on the current evidence of record. 
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 the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or 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-2010-03322 in Executive Session on 14 December 2010, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 Mar 10. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 

 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04322

    Original file (BC-2010-04322.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04322 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge characterization be changed to honorable and his grade of airman basic (AB/E-1) be changed to senior airman (SrA/E-4). He received a letter from Social Actions for failure to rehabilitate. The applicant...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02362

    Original file (BC-2011-02362.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 27 Mar 86, the applicant submitted a letter to his commander requesting he be considered for an honorable discharge. On 10 Apr 86, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge in the grade AB. 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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02024

    Original file (BC-2003-02024.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02024 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. He was told by the Air Force that his discharge would be upgraded to honorable in six months. Therefore, based on the information and evidence provided they recommend...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00999

    Original file (BC-2006-00999.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the information and evidence provided they recommend the request be denied (Exhibit D). _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant and counsel on 5 May 2006, for review and response. Exhibit E. Letters, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 May 06.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01414

    Original file (BC-2007-01414.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01414 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable and his reenlistment code (RE) be changed to one that would allow him to enlist in the Army. The applicant appealed to the Discharge Review board (DRB) to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01606

    Original file (BC-2010-01606.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01606 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The Air Force never provided him with the appropriate diagnosis, education or treatment. On 1 October 1985, the discharge authority determined that a general discharge was...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01026

    Original file (BC-2007-01026.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 6 May 1985, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend him for discharge from the Air Force under the provisions of Air Force Regulation (AFR) 39-10, Enlisted Personnel, Administrative Separation of Airmen, paragraph 5-49(c) for drug abuse. The applicant has not shown the characterization of his discharge was contrary to the provisions of AFR 39-10, Enlisted Personnel, Administrative Separation of Airmen, paragraph 5-49(c) (Exhibit D). ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02253

    Original file (BC-2007-02253.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02253 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 19 JAN 2009 ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His characterization of service be upgraded from general (under honorable conditions) to honorable. On 26 April 1985, he was notified of his commander's intent to recommend him for a...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01797

    Original file (BC-2007-01797.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 11 February 1988, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending him for discharge from the Air Force (AF) under the provisions of Air Force Regulation (AFR) 39-10 for misconduct (conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline.) The discharge authority approved the discharge and directed the applicant be discharged with a general discharge without probation and rehabilitation. The applicant has not shown the characterization of his discharge was contrary to the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00754

    Original file (BC-2006-00754.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00754 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 15 SEP 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code be changed to allow him reenter military service. Furthermore, the discharge notification letter the applicant received stated “If you are...