RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01761
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded
to honorable.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His discharge should be upgraded due to longevity, good conduct,
and because he earned achievement and expeditionary medals.
He joined the Army National Guard and received an honorable
discharge in 2003.
In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his
Army Achievement Medal and Honorable Discharge certificates.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 14 May 71, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force
and was progressively promoted to the grade of staff sergeant.
On 11 Jul 86, the applicant was notified by his squadron
commander that he was recommending his discharge from the Air
Force for misconduct. The basis for the proposed action was:
1) On 14 Sep 83, he was dismissed from Noncommissioned Officer
Leadership School for a continued pattern of misconduct; 2) On
18 Apr 86, he received an Article 15 for stealing food from the
Officers Open Mess. The punishment imposed was a suspended
reduction in grade to sergeant and a reprimand; 3) He received a
Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for testing positive for cocaine
during a Commander Directed urinalysis on 28 Apr 86; 4) On 5 May
86, he received a LOR for failing to pay his rent; and 5) On 11
Jul 86, the suspended portion of his Article 15 was vacated and
he was reduced to the grade of sergeant for failing to pay a
court-ordered debt for back rent.
On 16 Jul 86, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant
acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification and waived
his right to a hearing before an administrative discharge board
and offered a conditional waiver contingent upon receipt of no
less than a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.
The base legal office reviewed the case and found it legally
sufficient to support separation and recommended that he receive
a general discharge without probation and rehabilitation.
On 7 Aug 86, the discharge authority approved the separation and
directed a general (under honorable conditions) discharge
without probation and rehabilitation.
On 8 Aug 86, the applicant was discharged under the provisions
of AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen, for
Misconduct-Drug Abuse, and received a general (under honorable
conditions) discharge. He served on active duty for a period of
15 years, 2 months and 25 days.
On 16 Aug 89, the applicant applied to the Air Force Discharge
Review Board (AFDRB) requesting that his discharge be upgraded
to honorable. After reviewing the evidence of record, the AFDRB
concluded that no upgrade in discharge was warranted.
On 5 Dec 13, a request for information pertaining to his post-
service activities was forwarded to the applicant for response
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 on the basis of
clemency; however, we do not find the evidence provided
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 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 Docket Number
BC-2013-01761 in Executive Session on 27 Jan 14, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Apr 13, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 5 Dec 13, w/atch.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01696
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01696 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On 28 Jan 14, the applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to have his discharge upgraded to Honorable. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however,...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01323 INDEX CODE: 100.03, 100.06 APPLICANT COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 2C be upgraded. In support of his request applicant has provided a letter from AFPC/DPPRRB, dated 24 Mar 00, announcing the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) decision to...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00329
The reasons for the commander’s action were: a. On 1 Aug 01, the squadron commander recommended to the wing commander the applicant be discharged from the Air Force with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. On 23 Aug 02 the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied an appeal from the applicant to upgrade his discharge to honorable.
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00203
The applicant was discharged on 21 Feb 86. On 16 Dec 87, the applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to have his general discharge upgraded. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 21 February 1986, he was honorably discharged and furnished an Honorable Discharge certificate.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03914
d. On 23 Jun 87, the applicant received a LOR for failing to go to his appointed place of duty at the prescribed time on 6 different occasions. On 3 Dec 90, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied the applicants request to upgrade his general discharge to an honorable discharge and to change the narrative reason for separation, indicating the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulations and was within the sound...
AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0275
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD AFSN/SSAN NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE TYPE PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW COUNSEL NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL [YES | No | xX VOTE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS SITTING HON GEN UOTHC OTHER DENY x x Pe x xX xX a x ISSUES INDEX NUMBER EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD A94.05 A67.10 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 1 2 3 | LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 4 |...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-01606
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...
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...
The AFDRB 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. In addition, the DD Form 214 on file in the applicant’s personnel record was reissued as a result of the AFDRB decision and is correct. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-03513
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03513 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. 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...