RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03740
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be
upgraded to a general (under honorable conditions).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He received two Article 15s for simple possession of marijuana.
In the interest of justice, the character of service received is
too severe.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 24 November
1975.
The applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to
recommend that he be discharged from the Air Force under the
provisions of AFM 39-12. The specific reasons were as follows:
a. On 29 July 1976, the applicant was charged with the
possession of one ounce of marijuana. For this offense he
received an Article 15. His punishment consisted of reduction to
the grade of airman and forfeiture of $150.00 per month for two
months.
b. On 3 August 1976, the applicant was placed on the drug
rehabilitation program to help him remain clear of drugs. This
program was completed on 15 October 1976 and on 22 November 1976,
he was again charged with possession.
c. On 19 May 1977, the applicant was charged and pled guilty
to the possession of over eight ounces of marijuana. He was
fined $500.00, given a deferred sentenced and placed on probation
for a period of three years.
He was advised of his rights in this matter and waived his right
to a hearing before an administrative discharge board and elected
not to submit a statement on his own behalf. In a legal review
of the case file, the assistant staff judge advocate found the
case legally sufficient and recommended discharge.
The discharge authority concurred with the recommendation and
directed the applicant be discharged. The applicant was
discharged on 22 July 1977 with an under other than honorable
conditions (UOTHC) discharge. He served 1 year, 7 months and
28 days on active duty. His dates of lost time consisted of
27 November 1976 to 6 December 1976.
On 17 April 2013, a request for information pertaining to his
post-service activities was forwarded to the applicant for review
and response within 30 days (Exhibit C). As of this date, this
office has received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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-2012-03740 in Executive Session on 30 May 2013, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2012-03740 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 December 2012, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicants Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 17 April 2013.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03740
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 | CY2013 | BC-2012-02717
Since being discharged from the Air Force he has worked diligently to better his life and he is a productive citizen in his community. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. The applicant’s time in military service was about two years, and a little less than half of that time was spent either AWOL or in confinement.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03740-2
For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicants appeal and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board - see Exhibit D. In a letter to the Board dated 8 May 2013, received by the AFBCMR staff on 12 June 2013, the applicant states since being discharged from the Air Force he has worked 35 years as a crane operator. Therefore, we do not find the additional evidence presented is sufficient to warrant the relief sought on that basis. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03405
He served 3 years, 8 months and 13 days on active duty. 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 whether it was in the interest of justice to consider upgrade of his 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 | CY2010 | BC-2010-01499
On 7 March 1977, after consulting with counsel, the applicant filed her request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Air Force Manual 39-12, Chapter 2, Section F. She indicated that if her request for discharge was approved, she understood it may result in her receiving a UOTHC discharge. On 23 March 1978 and 8 December 1980, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicants request to upgrade her discharge. Furthermore,...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01268
The commander further recommended in his notification for discharge that the applicant’s service be characterized as general. On 7 June 1977, the administrative discharge board recommended the applicant be discharged for misconduct because of a civil conviction with a general discharge, and he not receive probation and rehabilitation. The Board staff, on 16 June 2004, requested the applicant provide documentation regarding his activities since leaving military service (Exhibit G) and on 8...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01364
Subsequent to the file being found legally sufficient, the discharge authority approved the request for discharge and directed the applicant be discharged with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. Furthermore, we do not find clemency is appropriate in this case since the applicant has not provided any evidence concerning his post- service activities. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 27 March 2012
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-05972
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTTER OF DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05972 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to general. 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 during the...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-03168
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03168 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The applicant was discharged from active duty in the grade of senior airman effective 19 March 1980 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04743
He served in the Air Force to the best of his ability and had a good service record. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented sufficient to compel us to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis. Exhibit C. FBI Report, dated 7 Mar 2012.