RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03015
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her general (under honorable conditions) be upgraded to
honorable.
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She believes she made a mistake under duress. She was not able
to sleep well after being sexually harassed during her clinical
rotation at Bethesda Naval Base. Instead of asking for help
from others, she turned to her boyfriend who believed it was her
fault that she was in this situation so he hit her. It was at
that point she began taking Valium and Percodan. She is more
mature, with the assistance from a doctor and is able to handle
her problem without breaking the law. She is a single mother
who has become a dependable and productive citizen.
Additionally, she has a good job with benefits, but cannot
afford dental insurance.
In support of her request, the applicant provides a copy of her
Benefits Statement and copies of her pretreatment estimates.
Her complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
_
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted into the Regular Air Force on 28 Dec 90.
The applicant was convicted by a special court-martial for the
following charges:
Charge I, Article 80: Specification: She did, at Andrews Air
Force Base, Maryland, on or about 5 Oct 92, attempt to steal
diazepam (Valium) a value of less than $100.00. She pled guilty
and was found guilty of this charge.
Charge II, Article 112a: Specification 1: On divers
occasions between on or about 11 Aug 92 and on or about 5 Oct
92, she wrongfully possessed some amount of oxycodone HCL
(Percodan) a schedule II controlled substance and diazepam
(Valium) a schedule IV controlled substance. She pled guilty
and was found guilty of this charge.
Charge III, Article 121: Specification: On divers occasions
between on or about 11 Aug 92 and 5 Oct 92, she stole diazepam
(Valium), oxycodone (Percodan), ibuprofen (Motrin), and naproxen
(Naprosyn) a value of less than $100.00. She pled guilty and
was found guilty of this charge.
On 11 Mar 93, the applicant was sentenced to confinement for
three months, forfeited $500.00 pay per month for three months,
and was reduced to the grade of E-2. The sentence was adjudged
on the same day.
The applicants commander recommended her for discharge under
the provisions of AFR 39-10, Chapter, 5, Paragraphs 5-49 and 5-
51. She received a general discharge on 25 Jun 93 after serving
2 years, 5 months, and 28 days on active duty.
________________________________________________________________
_
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 her 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.
________________________________________________________________
_
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 AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2013-03015 in Executive Session on 27 Feb 14, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Jun 13, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Panel Chair
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
4
3
This document contains information which must be protected IAW AFI 33-332 and DoD Regulation
5400.11; Privacy Act of 1974 as Amended Applies, and it is For Official Use Only (FOUO).
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2003-03941
In addition, they found the following; 1) no convening authority may apply the conditions on suspension to the confinement element of the adjudged sentence; 2) the period of suspension of the punitive discharge and reduction in grade, during which the applicant was required to participate satisfactorily in an acceptable sex offender FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – PRIVACY ACT OF 1974 rehabilitation program, was limited to five years; 3) involuntary appellate leave was to be applied to the...
AF | DRB | CY2001 | FD01-00017
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE I CASENUMBER FD-0 1 -000 17 GENERAL: The applicant appealed for upgrade of his discharge frombailreofiduct to h6-k applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), without counsel, at Andrews AFB, MD, on April 5,2001. Issue 2 : At the time of my court martial, the Base Commander was more likely to approve a "bad conduct" discharge or worse then receive approve lesser punishment. Issue 3: Out of the eight Air...
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0389
CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD02-0389 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. 4, 29 Sep 99) c. Time Lost: 12 Aug 99 - 1 Oct 99 (1 Month 20 Days) d. Art 15’s: (1) 30 Dec 98, Osan AB, Korea - Article 92. [am recommending your discharge from the United States Air Force based upon Commission of Serious Offenses.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01555
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01555 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be changed to honorable. On 28 Apr 14, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit c). In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence...
AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0119
CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE | gp 092-0119 —- GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable. Applicant was discharged for misconduct, namely drug abuse, Ecstasy and psilocyn mushrooms. ABQ as abusing drugs over a seven-month period, seven months in which she could have been pursuing her college education.
AF | DRB | CY2004 | FD2003-00508
CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board concludes 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. Attachment: Examiner's Brief DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD (Former AMN) (HGH A1C) 1. (Change Discharge to Honorable) Issue 1: On 9 Sep 97 I was discharged from...
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00053
mere AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN SRA | ee PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW ] NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL NONE MEMBERS SITTING ea ISSUES INDEX NUMBER f iS ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD A93.11, A94.05, A94.53 447.00 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE LETTER OF NOTIFICATION HEARING DATE 03-05-28 CASE NUMBER FD2003-00053 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL’S RELEASE...
AF | DRB | CY2006 | FD2005-00386
I " ' - - SAFIMRBR 550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 781 50-4742 SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COLNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, M D 20762-7002 AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 (EF-V2) Previous edition will be used AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE CASE NUMBER FD-2005-00386 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to general. The records indicated the applicant was financially irresponsible...
AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0213
CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD2002-0213 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable, change the Reason and change the RE Code. ISSUES: The applicant was discharged with a General Discharge for Misconduct — Commission of a Serious Offense. The respondent's commander has recommended that the respondent be separated from the United States Air Force with a general discharge under AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.52, for misconduct,...
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0387
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE CASE NUMBER FD02-0387 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. And, he received eight Records of Individual Counseling for reporting for mobility without proper equipment, acting in an unprofessional manner, negligent in the performance of duties, dereliction of duty (twice), late for work (three times), leaving a place of duty without authority, failure to complete assigned duties, and for receiving a...