Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-02582
Original file (BC-2010-02582.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2010-02582

                       COUNSEL:  NONE

                       HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was a good servicemember for eight years.   He  had  two  honorable
discharges and made airman of the month.  The only mistake he made was
using marijuana. He needs his  discharge  upgraded  to  obtain  better
employment.

Applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 21 Jan 71, the applicant contracted his initial enlistment  in  the
Regular Air Force.  He was progressively  promoted  to  the  grade  of
senior airman, having assumed the grade effective and with a  date  of
rank of 1 Oct 80.

On 8 Nov 92, the applicant’s  commander  notified  him  that  she  was
recommending his discharge from the Air  Force  for  misconduct  (drug
abuse).   The  specific  reason  for  the  discharge  action  was  his
possession and use of marijuana from 26 Mar 82 to 3 Aug 82.

In the notification for discharge, the commander cited  the  following
derogatory information:

      a.  On 29 Oct 82, he received a Letter of  Reprimand  (LOR)  for
failure to go.

      b.  On 19 Oct 82, he  received  an  LOR  for  wrongful  use  and
possession of marijuana.

      c.  On 3 Apr 81, he received an LOR for using  abusive,  profane
language constituting a serious breach of discipline  and  good  order
and unbecoming of an Air Force noncommissioned officer.

      d.  On 21 Jul 82, the Howard County Department of Public Welfare
submitted letter indicating the applicant was not providing support to
his dependent spouse.

His commander advised him of his rights in this matter.  On  3 Aug 92,
he acknowledged receipt of the notification of  discharge  and,  after
consulting  with  legal  counsel,  submitted  a   conditional   waiver
contingent upon receipt of an honorable discharge.

The staff judge advocate  reviewed  the  case  and  found  it  legally
sufficient to support separation and  recommended  discharge  with  an
UOTHC without probation and rehabilitation.

On 20 Dec 82, the discharge authority directed discharge with an UOTHC
without probation and rehabilitation.  He was discharged on 29 Dec 82.
 He served 11 years, 11 months and 8 days of active 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 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 AFBCMR  Docket  Number
BC-2010-02582  in  Executive  Session  on  27  Jan  11,  under   the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      , Panel Chair
      , Member
      , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 May 10, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Military Personnel Records.





                                        Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02582

    Original file (BC-2002-02582.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 6 and 8 Dec 00, legal reviews recommended that the applicant’s request for discharge in lieu of court-martial with a UOTHC characterization be approved. He had 18 years, 7 months and 23 days of active service. We therefore recommend that his records be corrected to reflect he continued on active duty until eligible for lengthy service retirement and that he was promoted to the grade of MSgt the day before his discharge.

  • 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 | CY2011 | BC-2010-004083

    Original file (BC-2010-004083.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04083 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. We considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to compel us to recommend...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201252

    Original file (0201252.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He received an LOR on 7 Apr 82 for failing to report for duty on 3 April 82. On 17 May 83, after consulting with counsel, the applicant requested discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his UOTHC discharge should be upgraded to honorable or general.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04934

    Original file (BC 2013 04934.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04934 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 2 Dec 80, the applicant was discharged for Misconduct – Drug Abuse – Board Waiver with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions) in the grade of airman first class. Should the applicant provide evidence pertaining...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04691

    Original file (BC-2011-04691.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The administrative discharge board met on 5 Nov 82 and recommended the applicant be furnished a UOTHC discharge without probation or rehabilitation. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge on the basis of clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient for us to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis at this time. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists to grant the relief sought in...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03875

    Original file (BC-2005-03875.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005- 03875 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 23 JUNE 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02035

    Original file (BC 2014 02035.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 5 Aug 83, the applicant was furnished a general discharge, and was credited with 1 year, 6 months, and 14 days of active service. On 3 Aug 85, the applicant applied to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to have his discharge upgraded to honorable. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Aug 14.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03391

    Original file (BC-2002-03391.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 11 Feb 83, the applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to recommend nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 of the UCMJ for wrongful possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia. After consulting counsel, applicant requested a hearing before an administrative discharge board and elected to submit statements on his own behalf. The board recommended that he be discharged because of misconduct with an under other that honorable conditions discharge and that he not be...

  • 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.