RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05140
COUNSEL: NONE
XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be
upgraded to Honorable.
2. His narrative reason for separation, Misconduct-Drug
Abuse, be changed.
________________________________________________________________
__
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He has served honorably during his entire time in the service.
He only had one positive urinalysis and did not abuse drugs.
The applicant provides no documents in support of his request.
His complete submission is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
__
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 19 Sep 1986, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force.
On 23 Feb 1987, his commander notified him that he was
recommending he be discharged under the provisions of AFR 39-10,
Administrative Separation of Airmen. The specific reason for
this action was his abuse of drugs as evidenced by a urine
specimen for which he received an Article 15.
On 23 Feb 1987, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the
discharge notification and on 9 Mar 1987, he submitted documents
for consideration.
On 5 Mar 1987, the Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) found the
discharge legally sufficient.
On 12 Mar 1987, the discharge authority directed the applicant
be discharged without probation and rehabilitation.
On 18 Mar 1987, he was discharged from the Air Force with a
general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The narrative
reason for separation is Misconduct-Drug Abuse. He served
3 years, 11 months, and 14 days of total active service.
On 4 Jan 1989, the applicant submitted a request to the Air
Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) for an upgrade to his
discharge.
On 24 Mar 1989, the applicant was notified that the AFDRB
considered his application and concluded that the discharge was
consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of
the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the
discharge authority and that the applicant was provided full
administrative due process.
On 2 Jul 2013, a request for post-service information was
forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days
(Exhibit C), as of this date, no response has been received by
this office.
________________________________________________________________
__
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 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 in this application.
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that
the application was denied without a personal appearance; and
that 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 this application
in Executive Session on 15 Aug 2013, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-
2012-05140:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Oct 2012.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 2 Jul 2013.
Acting Panel Chair
2
2
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02379
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02379 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 14 December 1987, his commander notified him of his intent to recommend him for discharge for misconduct. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00957
His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, reflects a separation code of JKK (Drug Use) and a narrative reason for separation of Misconduct - Drug Abuse. On 26 July 2012 the AFDRB concluded that the overall quality of the applicants service was more accurately reflected by an Honorable Discharge, but the reason and authority for discharge should remain unchanged. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case;...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00456
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS a general discharge without AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00456 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded to Honorable. If treatment for alcohol and narcotics were available at the time of his active duty service, he would probably still be actively serving in the...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 03253
On 10 Sep 1996, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force, with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). On 17 May 2002, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied the applicants request for a discharge upgrade. 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 | CY2013 | BC-2013-01508
On 22 Dec 88, the applicant was discharged for Misconduct Drug Abuse with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions) in the grade of airman. On 14 Oct 93, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicants appeal for upgrade of her discharge to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04598
On 25 Jan 2011, he was discharged from the Air Force, with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04545
On 3 Aug 09, the applicant submitted an appeal to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB). DPSOR states that based on the documentation on file in the applicants master personnel records, the discharge to include the narrative reason for separation and separation code was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. ________________________________________________________________ THE...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 01028
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-01028 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. Applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to have his general discharge upgraded to honorable. Based on the available evidence of record,...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04232
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. On 7 December 1998, the applicant submitted an appeal for upgrade of his discharge to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB). On 24 May 1999 the applicant was advised that since his case was denied by the AFDRB he had the right to appeal, in person, to the...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00326
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) upgraded his discharge to general (under honorable conditions). On 23 Sep 1975, the applicant submitted a request to the AFDRB for an upgrade to his discharge. On 15 Dec 1975, the applicant was notified that the AFDRB considered his application and concluded the character of his discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions).