Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01681
Original file (BC 2014 01681.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01681

					COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be 
upgraded.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He has been a productive member of society since his alleged 
incident with drug use in the Air Force.  He recognizes the 
importance of working hard and providing for his family.  
Currently, he is active in community programs that help people 
stay off drugs.  He has been drug, alcohol, and tobacco free for 
25 years.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 4 Oct 84, the applicant initially entered the Regular Air 
Force.

On 17 Apr 85, the applicant received Nonjudicial Punishment 
(NJP) for use of marijuana, which consisted of suspended 
reduction in rank, forfeiture of pay for two months, and 30 days 
correctional custody.

On 8 May 86, the applicant received NJP for failure to go to his 
required place of appointed duty, resulting in a suspended 
reduction in rank and extra duty.

On 2 Dec 86, the applicant requested to be discharged in lieu of 
court martial.  Charges and specifications pending against the 
applicant were two counts of distributing drugs on or about 
26 Aug 86, and one count of theft of money.



On 16 Dec 86, after review and recommendation by the applicant’s 
commander, and a review of legal sufficiency, the request to be 
discharged in lieu of court martial was approved by the approval 
authority.

On 19 Dec 86, the applicant was furnished a UOTHC discharge, in 
lieu of trial by court-martial, and was credited with 2 years, 
2 months, and 16 days of active service.

On 4 Aug 14, a request for post-service information was 
forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 
30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this 
office (Exhibit C).

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of 
primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached 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 an 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 
applicant’s post-service activities, there is no way for us to 
determine if the applicant’s 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, we find no basis to recommend granting 
the relief sought.


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material 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-2014-01681 in Executive Session on 28 Jan 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:



The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-01681 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Apr 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Aug 14.

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-01472

    Original file (BC-2008-01472.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2013 | BC 2013 00743

    Original file (BC 2013 00743.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    29, the General Court-Martial convening authority set aside the finding of guilty and the sentence from the applicant’s 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 applicant’s 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 | CY2014 | BC 2014 02112

    Original file (BC 2014 02112.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    We find no evidence of error or injustice in the available records and without evidence to support the applicant’s appeal we find no basis upon which to favorably consider this application. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient for us to conclude that the applicant’s post-service activities overcome the misconduct for which he was discharged. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01479

    Original file (BC 2014 01479.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 4 Jun 91, the applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to have his discharge upgraded; however, the AFDRB denied his application, concluding that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, was within the discretion of the discharge authority, and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process. The applicant has provided no evidence which would lead us to believe the characterization...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01555

    Original file (BC 2014 01555.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04757

    Original file (BC-2011-04757.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    She had an outstanding service record and she has been a good citizen since being discharged. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01023

    Original file (BC 2014 01023.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01023 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to under honorable conditions (general), to allow him to receive medical care from the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA). In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01788

    Original file (BC-2013-01788.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01788 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded. On 9 Jan 1981, his commander recommended the applicant’s request for separation be approved. On 9 Dec 2013, the applicant was afforded the opportunity to provide information...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03392

    Original file (BC 2014 03392.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The reasons for these actions are as follows: On 14 Feb 96, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for failure to obey a lawful general regulation to comply with the dress and personal appearance standards. On 3 Jan 96, the applicant received a LOR for making a false official statement that he had a medical appointment when he did not. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00190

    Original file (BC 2014 00190.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00190 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C). Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive...