Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00261
Original file (BC-2012-00261.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 

 
 
DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-00261 
COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

IN THE MATTER OF: 
   
   
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to 
honorable. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
He  believes  his  general  discharge  should  be  upgraded  to 
honorable. 
 
In support of the applicant’s appeal, he provides a copy of 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 22 July 1982. 
 
On 28 January 1985, the applicant was notified by his commander 
of  his  intent  to  recommend  that  he  be  discharged  from  the  Air 
Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10.  The specific reason was 
that on or about 31 December 1984, the applicant wrongfully used 
marijuana in the hashish form.  For this misconduct he received 
punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice. 
 
He was advised of his rights in this matter and after consulting 
with counsel the applicant elected to waive his right to submit a 
statement on his own behalf.  In a legal review of the case file, 
the deputy staff judge advocate found the case legally sufficient 
and  recommended  discharge.    The  discharge  authority  concurred 
with  the  recommendation  and  directed  a  general  discharge.    The 
applicant  was  discharged  on  5  March  1985.    He  served  2  years, 
7 months and 14 days on active duty. 
 
 
 
 
 

Pursuant  to  the  Board's  request,  the  Federal  Bureau  of 
Investigation  (FBI),  Clarksburg,  West  Virginia,  was  unable  to 
identify  with  an  arrest  record  on  the  basis  of  information 
furnished. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
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.  Additionally, due to 
lack of evidence of a successful post-service adjustment, we do 
not find it would be in the interest of justice to upgrade his 
discharge on the basis of clemency.  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  an  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. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

2 
 

The  following  members  of  the  Board  considered  AFBCMR  Docket 
Number BC-2012-00261 in Executive Session on 11 September 2012, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 
 
The  following  documentary  evidence  pertaining  to  AFBCMR  Docket 
Number BC-2012-00261 was considered: 
 
  Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 13 January 2012, w/atchs. 
  Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. 
 
 
 
 

 

3 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04246

    Original file (BC-2012-04246.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04246 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The applicant acknowledged his commander’s intent, his right to legal counsel, to present his case before an administrative discharge board and to submit statements on his...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00120

    Original file (BC-2012-00120.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00120 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. He served 5 years, 5 months and 27 days on active duty and credited with 2 years, 9 months and 4 days of foreign service. We took notice of the applicant's complete...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04476

    Original file (BC-2012-04476.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04476 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) characterization of discharge be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His discharge be upgraded to help him find suitable employment. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02036

    Original file (BC-2012-02036.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02036 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 4 Jan 1989, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force, with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). In the interest of justice, we considered...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00728

    Original file (BC-2013-00728.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00728 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. His narrative reason for separation (Misconduct – Drug Abuse) be changed. ________________________________________________________________ _ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04315

    Original file (BC-2011-04315.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04315 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00150

    Original file (BC-2013-00150.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00150 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was consistent with...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01955

    Original file (BC-2012-01955.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He assumed his discharge was upgraded until he requested his records on 2 Nov 2011. 2 On or about 5 Sep 1986, he failed to perform quality On or about 16 Oct 1987, he failed to report to work. In the interest of justice, 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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04159

    Original file (BC-2012-04159.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04159 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists to upgrade the applicant’s General (Under Honorable Conditions)...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03695

    Original file (BC-2012-03695.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03695 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 23 August 1988, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge to honorable and change his narrative reason for...