RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04663
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be
upgraded to honorable or general (under honorable conditions).
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He applied to receive Veteran benefits; however, was denied due
to his characterization of service.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of his
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active
Duty.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
_
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who
entered active duty on 1 February 1978 and was progressively
promoted to the grade of technical sergeant (E-6).
On 30 September 1988, the applicant submitted a request for
discharge in lieu of Court-Martial after he tested positive to a
commander-directed urine sample which tested positive for use of
cocaine. In his request, the applicant indicated that he
understood if his request was approved that he may be discharged
with a UOTHC discharge and that he may be deprived of Veteran
benefits.
On 7 October 1988, after considering the facts of the case, the
applicants commander recommended his request be approved with a
UOTHC discharge. After the Staff Judge Advocate found the case
to be legally sufficient, the discharge authority approved the
recommended discharge and directed the applicant be discharged
with an UOTHC discharge due to the serious nature of his
misconduct.
The applicant was discharged from active duty in the grade of
technical sergeant effective 28 October 1988 with a UOTHC
discharge under the authority of Air Force Regulation 39-10.
His DD Form 214 reflects the narrative reason for discharge as
Request for Discharge in Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial. He
served nine years, seven months, and ten 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 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, 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. Therefore, in the absence of
evidence to the contrary, the Board finds 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-2013-04663 in Executive Session on 22 May 2014, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection
with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-04663:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 8 Mar 13, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Discharge Case File.
Panel Chair
2
3
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01267
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01267 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be promoted to the grade of technical sergeant (TSgt) (E-6) effective the first promotion cycle he tested without his 7- skill level. Members compete for promotion in the CAFSC they hold as of the promotion eligibility cutoff date (PECOD) for a...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02776
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02776 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to general under honorable conditions. On 23 August 1988, the applicant, under advisement of counsel, requested that he be discharged from the Air Force in lieu of trial by...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00404
The applicant acknowledged he could receive an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge but, based on his almost 19 years of service, requested he be considered for a general discharge. On 11 August 1989, the Major Air Command Director of General Law found the file legally sufficient and recommended lengthy service probation be denied. On 16 October 1989, the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions in the grade of technical sergeant by reason of...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC 2010 02721
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02721 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 8 August 1991, the applicant submitted an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting a change in his discharge. ...
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 | CY2011 | BC-2011-03522
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03522 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-01472
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-01472 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. On 20 Dec 88, the applicant appealed to the AFDRB to have his UOTHC discharge upgraded to honorable. The AFDRB considered the evidence...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00640
She enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 21 January 1985 and was released from active duty on 5 April 1988 and transferred to the Reserves of the Air Force on 6 April 1988 and discharged on 3 February 1999. The evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 30 May 2003, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. The...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01216
On 19 December 2000, the discharge authority’s staff judge advocate recommended approval of the applicant’s request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial and that the applicant be discharged with a UOTHC characterization of service. It is also JA’s opinion that the applicant should not be allowed to use his discharge request to halt the court-martial process established by law as the proper means to adjudicate the criminal allegations against him and now, under the guise of an...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 05820
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement, and, copies of his Article 15; response to the Article 15; Area Defense Counsels response to the Article 15; request for suspension of nonjudical punishment; witness statements; referral EPR; career EPRs; awards, decorations, and recognitions; and character references. The complete JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSIM agrees with AFLOA/JAJMs recommendation to deny the relief sought to set aside the nonjudicial...