RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03522 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 1. His discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident during 13 years and 7 months of honorable service. 2. He was informed that his medical condition is a result of his military service and he is seeking medical attention for this disability. In support of his request, the applicant provide copies of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty; VA Form 21-22, Appointment of Veterans Service Organization as Claimant’s Representative and medical records. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 16 Aug 74, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force. On 9 Jan 88, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen, for Drug Abuse. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge. The specific reasons for the proposed action were: 1) On or about 13 Feb 87 to 2 Mar 87, the applicant received an Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for wrongful use of marijuana. For this misconduct, the applicant received a suspended reduction from the grade of staff sergeant to sergeant. 2) On 10 Sep 87, the applicant tested positive for Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) during a random urinalysis test. 3) On or about 10 Sep 87, the applicant received another Article 15, UCMJ, for wrongful use of marijuana. For this misconduct, the applicant received a reduction to the grade of sergeant, with a new date of rank of 8 Jan 88, and forfeiture of $200 pay per month for two months. On 13 Jan 88, the applicant after consulting with counsel, offered a conditional waiver to waive his right to an administrative discharge board hearing contingent upon receiving no less than a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. Contrary to the advice of the Staff Judge Advocate, the applicant’s commander recommended his service be characterized as general (under honorable conditions). On 24 Mar 88, the applicant tendered an unconditional waiver of his right to appear before an administrative discharge board. On 1 Apr 88, the Staff Judge Advocate reviewed the case and found it legally sufficient to support separation and recommended that he receive an UOTHC discharge without probation and rehabilitation. The special court-martial (SPCM) convening authority recommended the discharge authority to accept the unconditional waiver tendered by the applicant. On 6 Apr 88, the commander Air Force District of Washington, concurred with the recommendation and directed an UOTHC discharge without the opportunity for probation and rehabilitation. On 21 Apr 88, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force with an UOTHC discharge in the grade of senior airman. He served 13 years and 7 months of total active duty service. On 5 Jan 12, the applicant was offered an opportunity to provide information pertaining to his activities since leaving the service (Exhibit C). In response to the request the applicant provided a personal letter. The applicant states he made several trips home due to the deaths of three family members (brother, wife’s sister and mother) within a seventh month period. It was a very stressful time in his life, so he started smoking marijuana to deal with the grief. He tested positive in a random drug test and within a few weeks of the test, he was selected for promotion to the grade of technical sergeant. Since leaving the military, he has worked as a medical lab technician and enrolled in the Springfield Putnam licensed practical nursing (LPN) program, where he graduated at the top of his class in 1994. Currently, he is working at Physicians Healthcare in Longmeadow, MA as a visiting nurse, where he visits patients in their homes and assists with their medical needs. The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ 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. We have noted the information provided by the applicant related to his post service activities. However, we do not find this evidence sufficient to warrant favorable consideration of the applicant’s request based on clemency. 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 that the evidence presented did not 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 Docket Number BC- 2011-03522 in Executive Session on 10 Apr 12, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 24 Aug 11, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. SAF/MRBC, Letter, dated 5 Jan 12. Exhibit D. Applicant’s Letter, dated 30 Jan 12.