RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2016-03698

XXXXXXXXX (Member)	COUNSEL: NONE	

 	HEARING: NO	

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was wrongly released from the military and forced out after an exemplary career for a poor choice which had zero effect on his job performance.  Through most of his six-year career, he had no derogatory paperwork or bad marks in his personnel file.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a former Air Force senior airman (SrA).

On 20 Oct 11, the applicant was notified by his commander that he was being recommended for discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFPD 36-32, Military Retirements and Separations and AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, para 5.4 for drug abuse.  The specific reason for this action was between 1 Mar 11 and 31 Mar 11, the applicant used cocaine, ecstasy, and mushrooms.  On 25 Jul 11, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR). 

On 7 Feb 12, the discharge action was found legally sufficient, and the discharge authority approved the recommendation on 14 Feb 12.

On 27 Feb 12, the applicant received a general (under honorable conditions) discharge.  He was credited with five years and eleven months of active service.

On 2 May 13, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied the applicant’s request to upgrade his general (under honorable conditions) discharge to honorable, indicating the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant justified a change of discharge.  The board concluded that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, was within the discretion of the discharge authority, and the applicant was provided full administrative due process.

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

SAFPC/DRB recommends denial.  The applicant did not establish that any different inequity or impropriety took place at the time of the discharge than was originally considered.  The DRB determined that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent a copy of the SAF/DRB evaluation to the applicant on 20 Jun 18 for comment (Exhibit D), but has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the delay.
 
2.  The applicant exhausted all available avenues of non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.  After thoroughly reviewing all Exhibits, it is the Board’s opinion that the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of SAFPC-DRB and finds that a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  In the interest of justice, the Board considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, given the evidence presented, the Board finds no basis to do so.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records. 

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The applicant be informed the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, and the application will only be reconsidered upon receipt of relevant evidence not already considered by the Board.

CERTIFICATION:

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2016-03698 in Executive Session on 15 Aug 18:

, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member

All members voted not to correct the record.  The panel considered the following in Docket Number BC-2016-03698:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 22 Mar 16.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, DRB, dated 9 Nov 16.
Exhibit D:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 20 Jun 18.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.