Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01190
Original file (BC-2012-01190.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-01190 
COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

 
IN THE MATTER OF: 
 
       
 
       
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to 
honorable. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
At the time of his discharge he met the criteria for a waiver of 
discharge and had the support of his commanding officers.   
 
In  support  of  the  request,  the  applicant  provides  copies  of 
documents related to his request 
 
The  applicant's  complete  submission,  with  attachments,  is  at 
Exhibit A. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
On  15  Sep  94,  the  applicant  contracted  his  enlistment  in  the 
Regular Air Force.  He served as a Security Apprentice.   
 
On 23 May 96, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was 
recommending  his  discharge  from  the  Air  Force  for  drug  abuse.  
The specific reason for the discharge action was that on 19 Mar 
96, he received an Article 15 for wrongful use of marijuana.  For 
this misconduct he was reduced in rank to the grade of airman and 
received 30 days restriction to the base. 
 
His  commander  advised  him  of  his  rights  in  this  matter.    On 
3 Jun 96, he acknowledged receipt of the notification letter and, 
after consulting with legal counsel, submitted a statement in his 
own behalf. 
 
On 27 Mar 96, a request for a waiver of discharge was submitted 
by  the  applicant’s  first  sergeant  with  his  commander’s 
endorsement.  The  waiver  states  the  applicant  meets  all  seven 
retention criteria. 
 

The  legal  office  conducted  a  legal  review  and  the  staff  judge 
advocate  (SJA)  found  the  case  legally  sufficient  to  support 
separation and recommended a general (under honorable conditions) 
discharge without probation and rehabilitation.  The SJA further 
noted it appears the applicant has met 1 through 5 and 7 of the 
retention  criteria,  but  has  not  met  the  criteria  for  number  6.  
The  applicant  has  support  from  members  in  his  squadron  for 
retention;  however,  those  who  support  the  applicant  do  not 
address  the  broader  question  of  drug  abuse  on  a  base  with  a 
nuclear  mission.    Consideration  should  be  given  to  the  broader 
picture--the mission of the base, and the impact that drug abuse 
among members in sensitive positions would have on the mission--
retention  does  not  seem  to  be  in  the  best  interest  of  the  Air 
Force.  The applicant has not submitted evidence that justifies 
his retention. 
 
On 24 Jun 96, the discharge authority directed the applicant be 
furnished a general (under honorable conditions) discharge and he 
was discharged on 26 Jun 96 and credited with 1 year, 9 months, 
and 12 days of active service. 
 
A  copy  of  a  Federal  Bureau  of  Investigation  (FBI)  report, 
provided  pursuant  to  the  Board’s  request,  contained  no  entries 
subsequent to the applicant’s discharge (Exhibit C). 
 
On  27  Jun  12,  the  Board  staff  requested  the  applicant  provide 
documentation  concerning  his  activities  since  leaving  military 
service  (Exhibit  D).    In  response,  the  applicant  provides  a 
chronology  of  his  employment  history  and  two  character 
references.    His  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, the Board 
majority finds 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 

 

2 

the  offenses  committed.    We  considered  upgrading  the  discharge 
based on clemency; however, the Board majority does 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, the Board majority finds no 
basis upon which to recommend granting the relief sought.  
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: 
 
The majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of error or 
injustice and recommends the application be denied. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
The  following  members  of  the  Board  considered  AFBCMR  Docket 
Number BC-2012-01190 in Executive Session on 10 Oct 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 
 
 
 
 
By  majority  vote,  the  Board  voted  to  deny  the  application.    
voted to grant the relief requested but does not desire to submit 
a  Minority  Report.    The  following  documentary  evidence  was 
considered: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Feb 12, w/atchs. 
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 
Exhibit C. FBI Investigative Report. 
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 27 Jul 12, w/atch. 
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, 23 Aug 12, w/atchs.  

   Panel Chair 
   Member 
   Member 

    
Panel Chair  

 
 

   
   

 
 

 

3 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01747

    Original file (BC-2012-01747.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS did his job AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01747 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 26 Mar 96, the 39 WG/CC reviewed the case file and recommended the 16th Air Force commander (16 AF/CC) approve the applicant’s unconditional waiver...

  • 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01750

    Original file (BC-2012-01750.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In 1983, he was discharged as an Air Force Fire Fighter. On 7 Jul 83, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge in the grade of airman. We have considered the applicant’s overall record of service, and the events which precipitated the discharge, and his post service information; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to compel us to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02240

    Original file (BC-2007-02240.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 23 Jun 58, the Air Force Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for a discharge upgrade. Considered alone, we conclude the discharge proceedings were proper and the characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances. Therefore, the Board Majority recommends the applicant’s discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions) as a matter of equity and on the basis of clemency.

  • AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0249

    Original file (FD2002-0249.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Also, the applicant believes his discharge was improper because of the lack of education on using prescription drugs, The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropnety or inequity in this case on which to base an upgrade of discharge. In this case, the respondent submitted a statement attempting to show that he meets all of the seven retention criteria, in addition to numerous character letters. Therefore, discharge is appropriate.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03740

    Original file (BC-2011-03740.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03740 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). On 27 Jun 86, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force with a UOTHC discharge. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 2 Feb 12.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00479

    Original file (BC-2012-00479.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit F. HQ AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial of the applicant's request for a change of RE code. If the Board upgrades the applicant’s character of service to honorable his RE code would automatically change to 2C, which denotes "Involuntarily separated under AFR 39-10 with an honorable discharge." DPSOA will provide the applicant a corrected copy of his DD Form 214 with an RE code of 2B, unless otherwise directed by the Board.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00131

    Original file (BC-2006-00131.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 12 Jan 78, the applicant amended his original conditional waiver and waived his rights associated with an administrative discharge board hearing contingent on his receipt of no less than a general discharge. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Feb 06. Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 7 Feb 06.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01190

    Original file (BC-2004-01190.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01190 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable and her narrative reason for separation be changed to misconduct-general. But, it is our opinion that a general (under other than honorable conditions)...