RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00436 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_______________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

Her rank of master sergeant (E-7) be reinstated with her 
original date of rank of 1 January 2008. In addition, she be 
given Reserve pay and retirement points beginning January 2010 
to the present. 

 

_______________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

An administrative discharge board did not find her guilty of 
the alleged offense that led to her administrative demotion 
effective 23 February 2010. The exact same facts used to 
demote her were the same facts adjudged by the board to be in 
error. 

 

The applicant does not provide any evidence in support of her 
appeal. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. 

 

_______________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant is currently serving as a member of the Air Force 
Reserve. On 1 January 2008, she was promoted to the grade of 
master sergeant (E-7); however, she was later demoted to the 
grade of technical sergeant (E-6) on 23 February 2010 as a 
result of testing positive for Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC – the 
active ingredient in marijuana) at a level of 250 ng/ml. The 
Department of Defense cutoff for THC is 15 ng/ml. On 8 
November 2009, her commander notified the applicant that he was 
recommending her for discharge for Drug Abuse with a general 
(under honorable conditions) discharge. 

 

On 27 January 2011, a discharge board was held at Robins Air 
Force Base, Georgia, to consider the applicant’s case. At the 
board, the applicant testified under oath that her hairdresser 
told her that her boyfriend has intestinal cancer and that he 
uses medical marijuana in his food, and, that she might have 
given the applicant his food by mistake during a rugby 
fundraiser. After deliberating on the evidence, the board 
found the applicant did not wrongfully use marijuana, despite 


her positive urinalysis, and recommended she be retained in the 
Air Force Reserve. 

 

The remaining relevant facts, extracted from the applicant’s 
military personnel records, are contained in the evaluations 
from the Air Force offices of primary responsibility at 
Exhibits C and D. 

 

_______________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFRC/JA recommends denial. JA states that contrary to the 
applicant’s assertions, there is no error or injustice in this 
case. The applicant was demoted on her positive urinalysis, 
the results of which she has never contested. During the 
demotion process, she was afforded all of the rights to which 
she was entitled, including the opportunity to explain how 
marijuana got into her system. Her Wing Commander was not 
persuaded by her explanation, primarily because it was 
different from the explanation she gave him when he informed 
her of the positive test result. Likewise, the Numbered Air 
Force Commander was not persuaded by the applicant’s 
explanation and determined that demotion was appropriate. The 
commanders closest to the situation considered all the evidence 
in the case, including the applicant’s impeccable service 
record, and decided that demotion was the appropriate action. 

 

The discharge board that convened on 27 January 2011 found the 
applicant did not wrongfully use marijuana and recommended she 
be retained in the Air Force Reserve. However, the board’s 
decision does not make the demotion action an error or unjust. 
The fact that the board found she did not wrongfully use 
marijuana does not mean the commanders were wrong for finding 
she did. There is no requirement that a demotion action be 
reversed based on the findings and recommendation of a 
subsequent discharge board. 

 

The complete JA evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

AFRC/A1K recommends approval. A1K states that based on the 
AFRC Discharge Board findings, the applicant was not guilty of 
the alleged offense that led to her demotion on 23 February 
2010. Based on their recommendation, the applicant’s 
applicable local Wing leadership supports reinstating her rank 
to master sergeant and updating her records to reflect Reserve 
pay and retirement points. 

 

The complete A1K evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

_______________________________________________________________ 

 


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The discharge board’s decision that she did not wrongfully use 
marijuana makes the demotion action unjust because she has been 
absolved of the offense. Whether her commanders believe that 
she wrongfully used marijuana or not, it should have no bearing 
on the reinstatement of her rank once the discharge board 
returned her to duty. As a result, her grade of master 
sergeant should be restored with her original date of rank, and 
she should receive pay, and retirement points as though the 
incident never occurred. 

 

The applicant’s complete rebuttal, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit F. 

 

_______________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

 

1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by 
existing law or regulations. 

 

2. The application was timely filed. 

 

3. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice warranting 
relief. We note that AFRC/JA states there is no requirement 
that a demotion action be reversed based on the findings and 
recommendation of a subsequently discharge board. However, 
having carefully reviewed the applicant’s submission and the 
evidence of record, we find that since the administrative 
discharge board did not find the applicant guilty of the 
alleged offense that led to her demotion, there exists no 
reason for the demotion action. Therefore, we agree with the 
recommendation of the Air Force office of primary 
responsibility (AFRC/A1K) and adopt its rationale as the basis 
for our decision that the applicant has been the victim of an 
error or injustice with regards to her demotion. Accordingly, 
we recommend the records be corrected to the extent indicated 
below. 

 

_______________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

 

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air 
Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that: 

 

a. Her promotion to the grade of master sergeant effective 
and with a date of rank of 1 January 2008 be restored. 

 

b. She be credited seven Inactive Duty Training (IDT) 
points and pay at the grade of master sergeant for 
Retention/Retirement (R/R) year 9 April 2009 to 8 April 2010. 


 

c. She be credited with 36 IDT and 14 Active Duty Training 
(ADT) points and pay in the grade of master sergeant for R/R 
year 9 April 2010 to 8 April 2011. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

The following members of the Board considered this application 
in Executive Sessions on 29 September 2011, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The 
following documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2011-00436 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 Jan 10. 

Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFRC/JA, dated 13 Apr 11. 

Exhibit D. Letter, AFRC/A1K, dated 10 Jun 11. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Jun 11. 

Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 14 Jul 11, w/atchs. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair