RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01364
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of
service be upgraded to Honorable.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was entrapped into buying drugs for another Air Force member
who worked for the Air Force office of special investigation
(OSI). He had allowed his girlfriend to use his car and,
unknown to him, she smoked a joint in his car. The member found
it in his car and threatened to go to the First Sergeant if he
did not get him an ounce of cocaine. He (the applicant) was
scared and told him he would see if a lady he knew could get the
cocaine. He was able to get 2 grams of cocaine. He knew the
member was an OSI informant so, before giving him the package,
he made him snort some of the cocaine. This was captured on
camera. He has never failed a drug test.
In support of his request the applicant provides a handwritten
personal statement.
The applicants complete submission, with attachment, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
1. The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force
who entered active duty on 28 May 1986. He served as an
Administrative Specialist and was progressively promoted to the
grade of Senior Airman, (SrA), E-4, with a date of rank of
28 September 1988.
2. On 30 January 1989, court-martial charges were preferred
against the applicant for violation of the Uniform Code of
Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 112a, wrongful use, possession,
etc., of controlled substances. On 7 February 1989, after
consultation with legal counsel, the applicant submitted a
letter of request for discharge under the provisions of AFM 39-
10, Separation Upon Expiration of Term of Service, for
Convenience of Government, Minority, Dependency and Hardship,
Chapter 4, in lieu of trial by court-martial. In the letter,
the applicant confirmed he understood the elements of the
offenses as well as received copies of the documents pertaining
to the offenses with which he was charged. He further stated
that he understood that if his request was approved he may be
discharged under other than honorable conditions.
3. On 13 February 1989, the applicants commander recommended
the request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial be
approved and the applicant be furnished an under other than
honorable conditions discharge. 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. The applicant was released from active duty on
10 March 1989, and credited with 2 years, 9 months and 13 days
of active duty service.
On 7 November 2013, the applicant was given an opportunity to
submit comments regarding his post service activities
(Exhibit C). To date, a response has not been received.
________________________________________________________________
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. Furthermore, we do
not find clemency is appropriate in this case since the
applicant has not provided any evidence concerning his post-
service activities. Based on the foregoing, we find no basis to
recommend granting the relief sought in this application.
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-2013-01364 in Executive Session on 12 December 2013,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2013-01364 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 August 2011.
Exhibit B. Applicants Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 27 March 2012
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-01365 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: RONALD SMALL HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded and he be allowed to retire in the grade of master sergeant. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-05637
On 3 October 1989, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge and that he understood approval of the recommendation for his discharge could result in his receiving an other than honorable conditions separation. On 4 October 1989, after consultation with military legal counsel, the applicant submitted a written statement offering a conditional waiver of his rights associated with an administrative discharge board hearing. Subsequent to the file being found legally...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00132
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00132 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded and his civilian records cleared. He was given military counsel and pled guilty to two uses of cocaine. The applicants response, with attachments is at Exhibit...
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0365
CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE | b:9992-0365 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. b. Grade Status: A1C - 29 Aug 89 (Article 15, 29 Aug 89) SrA - 25 Feb 89 Alc - 25 Feb 87 Amn - 25 Aug 86 c. Time Lost: None. | Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio 25 Feb 86 7.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04742
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04742 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. He did not receive any help or counseling. In a response to a request for post-service information, the applicant provides an e-mail dated 24 Jul 14 which states he...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01292
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01292 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He would like his discharge upgraded based on his military personnel file and...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04525
In the letter, the applicant confirmed that he understood that this type of discharge, if approved, may result in his receiving an undesirable discharge under conditions other than honorable, regardless of the recommendation of the commander. On 5 March 1980, the applicant submitted an appeal for upgrade of his discharge to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB). ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00743
29, the General Court-Martial convening authority set aside the finding of guilty and the sentence from the applicants 1987 court-martial, and the preferred charges against the applicant were dismissed effective upon his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTCH). We took notice of the applicants complete submission in judging the merits of the case, to include his rebuttal response to the advisory opinion; however, we do not find the documentation presented sufficient to...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02290
On 10 January 1990, the United States Air Force Court of Military Review affirmed the applicant’s court-martial conviction. 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. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00989
The legal review did not include any information on the validity of the action, except to say that the AFDW Commanders action was appropriate, which essentially is no action. He attempted to use his rank of major to obtain further access to the flight line which was not otherwise allowable by public affairs protocols and he told the 354th Fighter Wing Vice Wing Commander he attempted to use his badge and credentials to access the base because he was testing the gate security procedures...