RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04479 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His discharge was based on an incident where his roommate was arrested and charged for possession of marijuana. He had never used controlled substances. He had no knowledge of his roommate’s drug use and did not deserve this type of discharge. This issue has bothered him. “Guilty by association” is not just cause for marring his record. In support of his request the applicant submits three letters of character reference. Not listed on the DD Form 149 but also provided is his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. The applicant’s complete submission with attachments is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 27 September 1979 and was progressively promoted to the grade of Senior Airman (SrA), E-4, with a date of rank of 1 April 1982. The applicant’s grade at the time of discharge was Airman First Class (A1C), E-3, with a date of rank of 3 September 1982. On 1 December 1982, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was recommending him for discharge from the Air Force for a pattern of misconduct, under the authority of Air Force Regulation (AFR) 39-10, Administrative Separation of Airmen, paragraph 5-47. The specific reason for the proposed action was; misconduct substantiated by the applicant’s involvement in behavior that was inconsistent with acceptable Air Force standards as evidenced by administrative and nonjudicial punishments he received for specific incidents of; being disorderly on station on 23 January 1981, admitted wrongful possession and use of marijuana, and failing to go to a scheduled dental appointment. On 1 December 1982, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge and his right to consult counsel, and submit statements on his own behalf. On 2 December 1982, the applicant opted to consult counsel and waived his right to submit statements on his behalf. On 28 March 1983, the request for discharge was approved, subsequent to the file being found legally sufficient. The discharge authority directed the applicant be discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) characterization of service without probation and rehabilitation. The applicant was released from active duty on 29 March 1982 and was credited with 3 years, 6 months and 3 days of active duty service. Pursuant to the Board's request, the FBI was unable to identify an arrest record on the basis of information furnished. On 29 March 2012, the applicant was given an opportunity to submit comments regarding his post-service activities (Exhibit C). In response, the applicant provided a statement indicating that following his discharge from the Air Force, he promptly found work and has been gainfully employed since. He has never been fired from a job. He is proud of his work ethic and commitment and has been with his current employer for the past 23 years. He is very active in his local community and was approached to run for the office of “City Council.” 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. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency and considered the applicant's overall post-service activities and accomplishments; however, the evidence submitted was not sufficient to compel us to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis. Therefore, we find no basis upon which to recommend relief. ________________________________________________________________ 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 this application BC-2011-04479 in Executive Session on 24 July 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, w/atchs dated 9 November 2011. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 March 2012. Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 11 April 2012, w/atch.