Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04479
Original file (BC-2011-04479.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04479 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

His discharge was based on an incident where his roommate was 
arrested and charged for possession of marijuana. He had never 
used controlled substances. He had no knowledge of his 
roommate’s drug use and did not deserve this type of discharge. 
This issue has bothered him. “Guilty by association” is not 
just cause for marring his record. 

 

In support of his request the applicant submits three letters of 
character reference. Not listed on the DD Form 149 but also 
provided is his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge 
from Active Duty. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 
27 September 1979 and was progressively promoted to the grade of 
Senior Airman (SrA), E-4, with a date of rank of 1 April 1982. 
The applicant’s grade at the time of discharge was Airman First 
Class (A1C), E-3, with a date of rank of 3 September 1982. 

 

On 1 December 1982, the applicant’s commander notified him that 
he was recommending him for discharge from the Air Force for a 
pattern of misconduct, under the authority of Air Force 
Regulation (AFR) 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen, 


paragraph 5-47. The specific reason for the proposed action 
was; misconduct substantiated by the applicant’s involvement in 
behavior that was inconsistent with acceptable Air Force 
standards as evidenced by administrative and nonjudicial 
punishments he received for specific incidents of; being 
disorderly on station on 23 January 1981, admitted wrongful 
possession and use of marijuana, and failing to go to a 
scheduled dental appointment. 

 

On 1 December 1982, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the 
notification of discharge and his right to consult counsel, and 
submit statements on his own behalf. On 2 December 1982, the 
applicant opted to consult counsel and waived his right to 
submit statements on his behalf. 

 

On 28 March 1983, the request for discharge was approved, 
subsequent to the file being found legally sufficient. The 
discharge authority directed the applicant be discharged with a 
general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service 
without probation and rehabilitation. The applicant was 
released from active duty on 29 March 1982 and was credited with 
3 years, 6 months and 3 days of active duty service. 

 

Pursuant to the Board's request, the FBI was unable to identify 
an arrest record on the basis of information furnished. 

 

On 29 March 2012, the applicant was given an opportunity to 
submit comments regarding his post-service activities 
(Exhibit C). 

 

In response, the applicant provided a statement indicating that 
following his discharge from the Air Force, he promptly found 
work and has been gainfully employed since. He has never been 
fired from a job. He is proud of his work ethic and commitment 
and has been with his current employer for the past 23 years. He 
is very active in his local community and was approached to run 
for the office of “City Council.” 

 

The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit D. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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. In the interest of 
justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency 
and considered the applicant's overall post-service activities 
and accomplishments; however, the evidence submitted was not 
sufficient to compel us to recommend granting the relief sought 
on that basis. Therefore, we find no basis upon which to 
recommend relief. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 this application 
BC-2011-04479 in Executive Session on 24 July 2012, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

, Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, w/atchs dated 9 November 2011. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 March 2012. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 11 April 2012, w/atch. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01156

    Original file (BC-2012-01156.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01156 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). After careful consideration of the applicant’s request and the available evidence of record, we find no evidence which indicates that the applicant’s service...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05829

    Original file (BC 2013 05829.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05829 XXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reentry (RE) code of 2X, which denotes "1st term, 2nd term or career airman considered but not selected for reenlistment under the Selective Reenlistment Program (SRP)," be changed to allow him reentry into the Air Force. On 29 September 2012, the applicant was honorably discharged from the Air...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02827

    Original file (BC-2011-02827.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02827 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general discharge be upgraded to honorable. In May 1977 the applicant received an Article 15 for possession of marijuana on base, with punishment consisting of a suspended reduction to the grade of Airman First Class, E-3,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04108

    Original file (BC-2011-04108.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04108 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for separation, “marginal performer assigned to organizational unit,” be changed to not reflect him as a marginal performer. On 1 July 1982 he was notified of his commander’s intent to discharge him from the Air Force for marginal...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03372

    Original file (BC-2011-03372.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03372 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. Furthermore, we do not find clemency is appropriate in this case since the applicant has not provided any evidence concerning his post- service activities. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00232

    Original file (BC-2010-00232.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00232 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded. On 21 July 2010, the applicant was given an opportunity to submit comments about his post service activities (Exhibit C). However, we...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04643

    Original file (BC-2011-04643.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 29 Nov 1982 he reported late for duty. On 25 Apr 1983 he failed to report for duty at the appointed time and place. 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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02222

    Original file (BC-2011-02222.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who entered active duty on 1 June 1982 and was promoted to the grade of airman (E-2) with a date of rank of 1 December 1982. The applicant responded by stating he had developed an alcohol drinking problem while in the service, but didn’t realize it at the time. ________________________________________________________________ The following members...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02632

    Original file (BC-2007-02632.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02632 INDEX CODE: 110.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. In response to our request, applicant provided post-service information, which is attached at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. Exhibit D....

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01153

    Original file (BC-2011-01153.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 26 August 1982, he received a Letter of Counseling (LOC) for dereliction of duty. When his wife who was also an active duty member had an affair he became very depressed. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-01153 in Executive Session on 21 June 2011, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form...