RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02656 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

1. He be given an honorable discharge certificate for the 
period Jul 1979 to Mar 1984. 

 

2. His Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) for the period Mar 1984 to 
Feb 1990 be upgraded to “under other than honorable conditions.” 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

During his court-martial his attorney was not fit to try his 
case because it was his first urinalysis case. 

 

Between 1983 and 1986 he worked for the Federal Prison Camp and 
had over 19 urinalysis tests. None of the tests were positive. 
He may have unknowingly ingested cocaine at a party after he 
tried someone’s cigar. 

 

He should at least be given recognition for his honorable 
service from 1979 through 1984. It has been over 19 years since 
he was discharged and he is getting older, his health is 
deteriorating, and he needs medication for these ailments. An 
honorable discharge will assist him with this. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at 
Exhibit A. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 7 Jun 1979, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force 
and on 28 Feb 1984, was discharged for the purpose of 
reenlistment. His service during this period was “honorable.” 

 

On 1 Mar 1984, the applicant reenlisted in the Regular Air Force 
and on 13 Feb 1990, he was separated with a BCD. 

 

DoDI 1336.01, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty (DD Form 214/5 Series), states that Military Services not 
providing the DD Form 214 will furnish the Service member a DD 
Form 256, "Honorable Discharge Certificate." 

 


Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation (FBI) provided a copy of an Investigative Report, 
date 1 Mar 2012 at Exhibit C. 

 

On 2 Mar 2012, a copy of the FBI report was forwarded to the 
applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit F), as 
of this date, no response has been received by this office. 

 

On 2 Mar 2012, the AFBCMR was unable to located his Military 
Personnel Records (MPR) and his case was administratively closed 
(Exhibit G). 

 

On 21 Dec 2012 his MPR was located and his application was 
reopened 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of 
the Air Force. Accordingly, there is no need to recite these 
facts in this Record of Proceedings. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial. JAJM indicates that upgrading his 
discharge is not appropriate and his request should be denied as 
untimely or on the merits. 

 

JAJM states the applicant was afforded all of the procedural 
rights offered by the court-martial and appellate process. The 
applicant pled not guilty to the offense and was able to have an 
impartial panel of officer members decide if he was guilty 
beyond a reasonable doubt. The members evaluated the evidence 
and determined that the appropriate punishment for the offense 
committed by the applicant was a BCD, confinement for one year, 
total forfeiture of all pay and allowance and reduction to the 
grade of E-1. 

 

After the trial, his case was automatically referred to the Air 
Force Court of Military Review. An appellate defense counsel 
was appointed to represent him after the Air Force Court 
affirmed the finding and sentence. His case was also reviewed 
by the United States Court of Military Appeals. There is no 
evidence of error or injustice in the processing of the 
applicant’s court-martial or appeal. 

 

He alleges error in his case because his attorney was not fit to 
try his case, because it was the attorney’s first case. There 
is no information in the record of trial to show whether his 
attorney was dealing with a urinalysis case for the first time. 
The transcript of trial shows that the attorney engaged in 
zealous defense of the applicant throughout the entire process. 

 


JAJM states that while clemency may be granted, the applicant 
provides no justification for his request, and clemency is not 
warranted in this case. Clemency in this case would be unfair 
to those individuals who honorably served their country while in 
uniform. Congress’ intent in setting up the Veterans’ Benefits 
Program was to express thanks for veterans’ personal sacrifices, 
separations from their family, facing hostile enemy action and 
suffering financial hardships. All rights of a veteran under 
the laws administered by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs are 
barred where the veteran was discharged or dismissed by reason 
of the sentence of a general court-martial. This makes sense if 
the benefit program is to have any real value. It would be 
offensive to all those who served honorably to extend the same 
benefits to someone who committed a crime such as the 
applicant’s while on active duty. 

 

The complete AFLOA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

On 5 Oct 2011, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded 
to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. As of 
this date, no response has been received by this office (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 in regard to the 
applicant’s request that his BCD be upgraded to under other than 
honorable conditions. We note this Board is without authority 
to reverse, set aside, or otherwise expunge a court-martial 
conviction. Rather, in accordance with Title 10, United States 
Code, Section 1552(f), our actions are limited to corrections to 
the record to reflect actions taken by the reviewing officials 
and action on the sentence of the court-martial for the purpose 
of clemency. We find no evidence which indicates the 
applicant’s service characterization, which had its basis in his 
court-martial conviction and was a part of the sentence of the 
military court, was improper or that it exceeded the limitations 
set forth in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). We 
considered upgrading the discharge on the basis of clemency; 
however, in view of the contents of the FBI identification 


record, we are not persuaded the characterization of the 
applicant’s discharge warranted an upgrade. 

 

4. Notwithstanding the above, sufficient relevant evidence has 
been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or 
injustice regarding the applicant’s request that he be provided 
an honorable discharge certificate for his initial period of 
service from 7 Jun 1979 through 30 Apr 1984. In this respect we 
note that DoDI 1336.01 specifically states, “… Military Services 
not providing the DD Form 214 will furnish the Service member a 
DD Form 256, Honorable Discharge Certificate.” In view of this 
and since the applicant did not receive a DD Form 214 in 
conjunction with his discharge for immediate reenlistment, we 
believe he should be issued a DD Form 256 in accordance with the 
governing instruction for his initial period of service. 
Therefore, we recommend that the records be corrected to the 
extent indicated. 

 

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 issue(s) 
involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably 
considered. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: 

 

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air 
Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that he be 
issued an Honorable Discharge certificate for his honorable 
discharge on 28 Feb 1984. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

All members voted to correct the record as recommended. The 
following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2011-
02656 in Executive Session on 9 May 2013, under the provisions 
of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 


All members voted to correct the record as recommended. The 
following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-2011-
02656: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 Nov 2010, w/atch. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. FBI Report, dated 1 Mar 2012. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 26 Sep 2011. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR 5 Oct 2011. 

 Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 2 Mar 2012. 

 Exhibit G. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 2 Apr 2012. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair