RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00694
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to
an honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was told that instead of attending rehabilitation he could
have his discharge upgraded if he stayed out of trouble. He
further states he has a Bachelor of Science Degree in Computer
Information Technology and has had no problems since leaving the
Air Force.
The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 23 July 1984.
The applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to
recommend his discharge from the Air Force under the provisions
of AFR 39-10 Drug Abuse. The specific reason is the applicant
did, on or about 18 February 1986 and on or about 24 February
1986, wrongfully possess marijuana, a schedule 1 controlled
substance.
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 staff judge advocate found the case legally sufficient and
recommended discharge. The discharge authority concurred with
the recommendation and directed a general (under honorable
conditions) discharge. The applicant was discharged on 26 March
1986. He served 1 year, 8 months and 4 days on active duty.
On 7 March 2013, a request for information pertaining to his
post-service activities was forwarded to the applicant for review
and response.
The applicant provided a response stating he has been married for
eighteen years, became a foster parent, plus took in two of his
sisters grandchildren ages 3 and 18 months. In 2002, he went
back to school and received an Associates Degree in Computer
Networking and in 2007 he received a Bachelor of Science Degree
in Computer Networking.
The applicants complete response, with attachment, 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;
however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient 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 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.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2012-00694 in Executive Session on 4 April 2013, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 January 2012.
Exhibit B. Applicants Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Email Communique, AFBCMR, dated 7 March 2013.
Exhibit D. Email Communique, Applicant, dated 19 March 2013,
w/atch.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02861
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicants military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit B. His service dates were verified by DPSIPV; the error in his pay date was discovered and corrected removing the credit for the time he was in ROTC. DPSIPV has corrected his DIEUS date in the MilPDS to the date he entered ROTC 28 September 1984.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02314
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02314 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01951
On 22 April 1998, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request that his general discharge be upgraded to honorable (Exhibit B). 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. We considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to compel us...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00987
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicants military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit B. The DPSIT complete evaluation is at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ _ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 16 April 2012, he elected to...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01381
As a result, his record was corrected to reflect an ADSC expiration date of 23 May 18 for the scholarship program. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He believes his corrected ADSC expiration date is miscalculated for the updated AF Form 63. He agrees with DPSIPVs statement, if the Boards decision is to grant the relief sought, the record will be adjusted to reflect an ADSC expiration date of 23 May 15. However, if the Boards decision is to deny relief, he requests his record be...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02238
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Applicant provides a resume of her education and experience and a copy of her transcript where she was awarded her Bachelor of Science in Nursing and Master of Science in Nursing. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01449
Last year he received a $40,000 retention bonus. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states in 2003 the Air Force deemed his AFSC critical enough to offer him a $40,000 retention bonus. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-05210
He completed the required application to transfer his Post- 9/11 GI Bill TEB to his dependent. On multiple occasions in the months of January through March, his network administrators worked on his computer multiple times a week sometimes even several times a day. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 22 February 2010, he...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-05564
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05564 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions (UHC)) 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02712
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the AFEM. The DPAPP complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 26 November 2012 and 8 March 2013, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and response. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...