RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00728
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be
upgraded to an honorable.
2. His narrative reason for separation (Misconduct Drug
Abuse) be changed.
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His discharge was based on a one time isolated incident. He
believes his discharge to be unjust.
In support of the applicants appeal, he provides documents
extracted from his military personnel records.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
_
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant with prior service reenlisted in the Regular Air
Force on 5 July 1985.
The applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to
recommend that he be discharged from the Air Force under the
provisions of AFR 39-10 (Misconduct Drug Abuse). The specific
reasons follow:
a. The applicant on diverse occasions between 1 October
1985 and 31 December 1985 wrongfully use marijuana. For this
misconduct he received an Article 15, placed on the control
roster, his Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO) status was vacated,
and he was enrolled in the drug rehabilitation program.
b. The applicant did on or about 23 October 1986 wrongfully
use marijuana. For this misconduct he received a Letter of
Reprimand.
He was advised of his rights in this matter and elected not to
provide a statement on his own behalf. In a legal review of the
case file, the staff judge advocate found the case legally
sufficient and recommended discharge. The discharge authority
concurred with the recommendation. The applicant was discharged
with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge on 10
March 1987. He served 1 year, 8 months and 6 days on active
duty with the current enlistment and 3 years, 1 month and 7 days
on active duty with his prior enlistment.
________________________________________________________________
_
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 and narrative reason
for separation were 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, based on the evidence
before us, we find no basis to grant clemency at this time.
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 the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice; the
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2013-00728 in Executive Session on 5 November 2013,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 December 2012, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicants Master Personnel Records.
2
3
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04246
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04246 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The applicant acknowledged his commanders intent, his right to legal counsel, to present his case before an administrative discharge board and to submit statements on his...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05641
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05641 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. 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 during the discharge process. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04159
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04159 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists to upgrade the applicants General (Under Honorable Conditions)...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05667
On 21 January 1985, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant submitted a statement in regards to the Article 15 action as to why his urinalysis test came back positive and a copy of an Air Force Times article. On 6 July 1988, the applicant applied 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, we do not find the evidence presented is...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01268
On 12 March 1997, the applicant requested an administrative discharge board. On 21 April 1997, his commander amended his 11 March 1997 notification memorandum by adding an additional reason for discharge (the applicants civilian arrest for firing a handgun at a civilian residence). ________________________________________________________________ _ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-01268 in Executive Session on 12 December 2013, under the provisions...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03384
Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the applicants general (under honorable conditions) discharge for drug abuse was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the discharge authoritys discretion. Therefore, in view of the above, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we conclude that no basis exists to upgrade the applicants general discharge. Applicant's Master Personnel Records Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 28 Mar 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02764
The applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to recommend his discharge from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10 (Misconduct - Drug Abuse). The discharge authority concurred with the recommendation and directed a general discharge. On 4 September 1997, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicants request that his general discharge be upgraded to honorable.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01296
The commander indicated in his recommendation for discharge action that before recommending the discharge, the applicant was counseled formally by the squadron staff and social actions personnel. On 10 May 2005, the Board staff requested the applicant provide post- service documentation within 20 days (Exhibit F). Although the applicant did not specifically request consideration based on clemency, we also find insufficient evidence to warrant a recommendation that the discharge be upgraded...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01440
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01440 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge for misconductdrug abuse be upgraded to Honorable. The reason for the Article 15 was the applicant did, on diverse occasions between 1 Apr 79 and 1 Apr 80, wrongfully use marijuana. In the interest...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02505
On 10 March 1988, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicants request that his UOTHC discharge be upgraded to general. 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. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 June 2014.