RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02505
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be
upgraded.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The evidence against him is weak in comparison to his military
performance. The urinalysis administered was tainted.
The applicants complete submission is at Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant entered active duty in the Regular Air Force on
7 May 1980.
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 are as follow:
a. On numerous occasions, the applicant failed to pay
outstanding debt.
b. The applicant did write numerous worthless checks from
1 September 1982 to 1 August 1984. The applicant exhibited a
continued pattern of financial irresponsibility which resulted
in his placement on the control roster.
c. The applicant failed to support his wife and child from
September 1984 until November 1984.
d. The applicant did wrongfully possess marijuana during
the period July 1984 through 17 September 1984. For this
misconduct the applicant received a letter of reprimand (LOR).
e. On 18 October 1984, the applicant was derelict in the
performance of his duties. Further, on 19 October 1984, he
failed to show at the time prescribed to his appointed place of
duty.
He was advised of his rights in this matter and acknowledged
receipt of the notification.
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 recommendations and
directed discharge with a UOTHC discharge. The applicant was
discharged on 1 February 1985. He served 8 years, 7 months and
29 days on active duty and credited with 3 years, 2 months and
11 days of foreign service.
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. The board concluded that the
discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive
requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the
discretion of the discharge authority and that the applicant was
provided full administrative due process (Exhibit B).
On 21 June 2014, a request for information pertaining to his
post-service activities was forwarded to the applicant for
review and response within 30 days (Exhibit C). As of this
date, no response has been received by this office.
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, 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 in this application.
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-2014-02505 in Executive Session on 12 March 2015,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 June 2014.
Exhibit B. Applicants Available Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 June 2014.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01839
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01839 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 4 May 2014, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C), as of this date, no response has been received by this office. THE BOARD DETERMINES...
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 | CY2013 | BC 2013 05579
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05579 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). As of this date, no response has been received by this office. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04348
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. On 7 March 2012, the applicant was given an opportunity to submit comments about his post service activities and in response to the FBI Report (Exhibit D). Exhibit B.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01835
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01835 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. The applicant was discharged on 16 May 1990. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 16 December 2013.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03299
On 17 Jun 88, the separation authority approved the applicants unconditional waiver indicating he would be discharged in absentia at the earliest possible date. 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. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01788
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 applicants request for separation be approved. On 9 Dec 2013, the applicant was afforded the opportunity to provide information...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00855
On 14 Dec 83, the applicant received an UOHTC discharge, and was credited with 9 years, 8 months and 17 days of active service. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the characterization of the applicants discharge based on clemency; however, after considering his overall record of service, the infractions which led to his administrative separation and the lack of post- service information we are not persuaded that an upgrade is warranted. Exhibit C. Clemency Information...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02239
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01139 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to Honorable. His Reenlistment eligibility status be changed to Eligible. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The desired outcome of his personal appearance before the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) was not reached. On 5 December 2003, the AFRC/CV...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00394
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He would very much like the Board to review his file and upgrade his discharge. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to recommend granting relief on that basis. 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;...