RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00791 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. 2. His reason for separation be changed from drug abuse to medical/mental disorder. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was not given a fair chance to correct his behavior before the Air Force discharged him for misconduct due to drug abuse. He was having a lot of mental problems while on active duty that can be verified through his service treatment records. He does not think the Air Force really tried to help him not use drugs. He was allegedly using synthetic drugs; however, he was involved in drug apprehension as a Security Forces member. Had the Air Force done more to help him with his mental problems, he could have finished his enlistment. His overall conduct while in the military was good except for this alleged drug abuse. Additionally, his Army Achievement Medal should have been considered in the type of discharge he received. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, Army Achievement Medal, DA Form 638, Recommendation for Award and AF IMT 100, Request and Authorization for Separation, a certificate of completion from an extended care program and a certificate of sobriety. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 24 June 2008. The applicant was separated on 25 May 2011 with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. His narrative reason for separation was listed as misconduct – drug abuse. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility which is listed at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial. On 2 May 2011, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to discharge him from the Air Force for drug abuse. Specifically, between on or about September 2009 and December 2009, he failed to obey a lawful order by wrongfully using a form of synthetic marijuana commonly known as spice. The applicant submitted a statement in which he admitted to using spice. The presence in the military environment of a person who abuses drugs seriously impairs the accomplishments of the military mission. Drug abuse is also a substantial departure from the conduct expected of an airman and warrants a general discharge characterization. AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, Misconduct, states that airman who abuse drugs one or more times are subject to discharge for misconduct. Paragraph 4.54.1 defines drug abuse as illegal, wrongful or improper use, possession, sale, transfer or introduction onto a military installation of any drug. A drug is a controlled substance as defined by Title 21 United States Code 812, or any other substance other than alcohol ingested into the body to alter mood or function. Discharge processing for drug abuse is mandatory. Drug use is abuse if it is illegal, improper or wrongful. If an order or regulation prohibits the use of a substance, discharge processing is also mandatory. A substance does not have to be illegal or banned by order regulation, a commander can determine a members use of a substance was improper or wrongful based on the circumstances of the use. The applicant used spice to alter his mood or function on several occasions. He used spice on base and in the company of other airmen. The commander was well within his discretion to find the use improper or wrongful and initialed discharge action. Based on the documentation in the file, the discharge action was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. The applicant did not submit any evidence or identity any errors or injustices in the discharge processing. He provided no facts warranting a change to his character of service or changes to his DD Form 214. The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 5 April 2013, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C). As of this date, this office has received no response. ________________________________________________________________ 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 during the discharge process. 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 narrative reason for separation was contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation. Therefore we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought. 4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. ________________________________________________________________ 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-00791 in Executive Session on 5 November 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 Jan 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 27 Mar 13. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 5 Apr 13. 1 2