Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04921
Original file (BC-2011-04921.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04921 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

His UOTHC discharge is unjust because it does not accurately 
reflect his character. Since his discharge, he has made 
remarkable changes from the person that he was at the time of his 
separation. He believes he would have been able to make these 
changes while in the military if he had not been separated. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his 
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 21 Jun 93, the applicant contracted his enlistment in the 
Regular Air Force. 

 

On 27 Sep 94, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was 
recommending his discharge from the Air Force for fraudulent 
entry. The specific reason for the discharge action was he 
provided false information on his enlistment documents pertaining 
to prior civilian illegal drug use. On 31 Oct 94, the 
applicant’s commander amended the notification letter to include 
the fact the applicant revealed that he willingly used 
methamphetamines in Apr 94 to the Air Force Office of Special 
Investigation (AFOSI). 

 

On 31 Oct 94, the case was found legally sufficient and referred 
to an administrative discharge board. 

 


On 11 Jan 95, an administrative discharge board convened and, 
after considering all the facts and circumstances of the 
applicant’s case, recommended the applicant be furnished a UOTHC 
discharge. 

 

On 28 Feb 95, the findings and recommendations of the 
administrative discharge board were found legally sufficient and, 
the discharge authority directed the applicant be furnished a 
UOTHC discharge. On 10 Mar 95, the applicant was furnished a 
UOTHC discharge and was credited with 1 year, 8 months, and 20 
days of active service. 

 

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation (FBI) provided a copy of an Investigative Report 
which is attached at Exhibit C. 

 

A copy of the FBI Investigative Report and a request for post-
service information was forwarded to the applicant on 3 Jul 12 
(Exhibit D). In response, the applicant states he hid his pre-
service drug use because he was afraid it would hinder his 
options for a career in the military. While on active duty he 
was in denial and thought he could control his drug use. After 
being discharged, his drug use continued. His drug use led him 
into repeated contact with law enforcement and multiple 
convictions. He offers no excuses for any of it. His criminal 
history reflected on the FBI report is directly attributable to 
his drug addiction. Although not all of the charges were drug 
related, each and every act was done because of the obsessive and 
compulsive nature of his addiction – his "need" to acquire more 
drugs. Finally, he reached out and received support from loved 
ones; and has been in recovery for over eight years. He has had 
steady employment with the same employer for almost seven years. 
He hopes that some understanding may be provided by this letter 
and that together with the letters that others have written and 
submitted on his behalf, the review board will see fit to take 
into account the changes he has made in his life and grant a 
clemency upgrade of his discharge. 

 

The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at 
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 an error or injustice. We took 
notice of the applicant's complete submission, to include his 


rebuttal, 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 discharge 
authority’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 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-2011-04921 in Executive Session on 7 Aug 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Sep 11, w/atch. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Military Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. FBI Investigative Report. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 3 Jul 12, w/atch. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 27 Jul 12, w/atchs. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 



Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2009 | BC-2009-01505

    Original file (BC-2009-01505.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 23 Sep 94, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge. On 29 Jun 09, the applicant provided a personal statement, a character reference letter, and excerpts from his military personnel records (Exhibit E). ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0100838

    Original file (0100838.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 29 Jun 95, applicant was notified that his commander was recommending that he be discharged from the Air Force for fraudulent entry. The Board requested applicant provide additional evidence pertaining to his post-service activities (Exhibit G). We note the letters of recommendation provided from applicant’s Military Personnel Records from 1995.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02664

    Original file (BC-2007-02664.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFOLA/JAJM recommends denial. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC 2010 02630

    Original file (BC 2010 02630.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02630 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded. In response to our request, applicant provided post-service information, which is attached at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00689

    Original file (BC-2010-00689.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 2 Aug 84, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge, concluding the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, was within the discretion of the discharge authority, and he was provided full administrative due process. In response, the applicant provides a statement describing his activities since his discharge as well as two letters in support of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03035

    Original file (BC-2011-03035.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    For these actions he received a LOR, which was placed in his UIF. On 2 Feb 12, a copy of the FBI report and a request for post- service information were forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). While the applicant only references his civilian conviction for DUI as the basis for his discharge, it was but one of several issues which formed the basis for his administrative discharge for a pattern of misconduct, to include committing carnal knowledge with a...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00225

    Original file (BC-2009-00225.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He had no idea about the effects of drug addiction, neither did the Air Force at that time. On 6 Mar 86, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10, by reason of misconduct – drug abuse, with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). ___________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-01606

    Original file (BC-1998-01606.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 5 Apr 89, the applicant was notified by the commander that he was recommending the applicant be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10, paragraph 5-50.1, for drug abuse with service characterized as general. On 6 Jul 90, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge to honorable. Therefore, the Board recommends his discharge be upgraded to honorable and a majority of the Board recommends his RE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9801606

    Original file (9801606.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 5 Apr 89, the applicant was notified by the commander that he was recommending the applicant be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10, paragraph 5-50.1, for drug abuse with service characterized as general. On 6 Jul 90, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge to honorable. Therefore, the Board recommends his discharge be upgraded to honorable and a majority of the Board recommends his RE...