RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03095
XXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge for misconduct be withdrawn and he be eligible to return to active duty.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was not aware that his discharge was due to misconduct and the decisions he made at 19 years of age were of poor choice. However, he has been a faithful citizen and he is prepared to return to the service of his country with more mature decisions. He only asks to have an opportunity to have his record changed so he may return to serving his country honorably.
The applicants complete submission, is at Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who enlisted in the grade of airman basic (E-1) on 15 Jan 97.
On 11 Aug 97, the applicants commander notified him he was recommending him for discharge from the Air Force for misconduct - drug abuse with a General (Under Honorable Conditions) characterization of service based on the following:
a. On or about 18 Jun 97, applicant wrongfully possessed some amount of marijuana. He received nonjudicial punishment, under Article 15, consisting of restriction to the base and 30 days extra duty.
b. On or about 18 Jun 97, applicant wrongfully distributed some amount of marijuana.
The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge and was afforded the opportunity to submit statements in his own behalf.
On 21 Aug 97, the discharge authority approved the separation under AFI 36-3208, Chapter 5, Section H, and directed the applicant be furnished a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge without probation and rehabilitation.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. Additionally, the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that warrant a change to his separation code or his narrative reason for separation.
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C.
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 agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. 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 instruction, unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses committed. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, in the absence of any evidence related to the applicants post-service activities, there is no way for us to determine if the applicants accomplishments since leaving the service are sufficiently meritorious to overcome the misconduct for which he was discharged. Should the applicant provide documentary evidence relating to his post-service activities, he could apply for reconsideration based on new evidence. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis 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-2013-03095 in Executive Session on 11 Dec 2014, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
XXXXXXXXXXX, Chair
XXXXXXXXXXX, Member
XXXXXXXXXXX, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 24 Jun 13.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 30 Aug 13.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Oct 13.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-00622
AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial of the applicant’s request for retirement in lieu of his acceptance of VSI, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. His request for release was clearly voluntary and the Air Force separated him as he requested on 3 Jan 94. The applicant receives an annual VSI payment of $12,372.75 for 38 years from his 3 Jan 94 separation date.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01412
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01412 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. His non-judicial punishment (NJP), received on 16 Sep 13, under Article 15 be removed from his military record. The applicants discharge case went to the SAFPC for review and decision as to whether or not to administratively discharge the applicant or allow him to be permanently retired.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03294
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03294 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for separation be changed from Misconduct Pattern of Minor Disciplinary Infractions to Convenience of the Government, or Reduction in Force. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-03785
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-03785 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His request for retirement effective 1 Jun 09 be withdrawn, and his promotion sequence number for promotion to the grade of master sergeant be reinstated. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-05133
He was involuntarily extended beyond his retirement date, past his high year of tenure and should have been promoted to master sergeant so that the government could have legally retained him for trial. Furthermore, the specific time and date of the incident for which he was convicted could not be determined, so the government extended the time frame of the charges alleged. The time frame properly charged by the government was between, on or about 1 Jan 95 and on or about 30 Sep 97,...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01385
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility which are included at Exhibits C and D. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPAPP recommends approval, indicating there is evidence of an error or injustice. The applicant’s DD Form 214 accurately reflects his Foreign Service Credit for his assignment to Clark Air Base but does not show...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-01561
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The SJA did not agree with the General Court Martial (GCM) conviction and delayed his retirement so he would retire in the grade of staff sergeant rather than master sergeant. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02037
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of documents extracted from his military personnel records pertaining to matter at hand, and an excerpt from Air Force Instruction (AFI), 36-2606, Reenlistment in the United States Air Force. Under the provisions of the AFI, a service member receiving a 1J RE code is eligible to reenlist; however, the AFI also states the service member is allowed to reenlist if he is otherwise eligible, must be present for duty, and will not reenlist...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05330
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05330 COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His narrative reason for separation, which reflects Marginal Performer Assigned to Organizational Unit, be changed. His personnel records indicate he requested that his shift commander write a letter concerning his incompetency as a...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 03095
________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial. DPSIM states the applicant provided an AF Form 108, dated 28 Jun 2012, which reflects he was evaluated and did not have a medical condition that precluded the achievement of a passing FA score. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary...