RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01923 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. 2. His narrative reason for separation (Misconduct Abuse – Eval Officer) be changed. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He has matured since his discharge from the Air Force – 30 years ago. The change in his character of service and narrative reason will help him as far as benefits for school. In support of the applicant’s claim, he provides a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active uty. The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 20 December 1978. The applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to recommend his discharge from the Air Force under the provisions of AFM 39-12. The specific reason was the result of the applicant’s own admission that he had no intentions of abstaining from the use of illegal drugs after being apprehended for possession of marijuana. His use of illegal drugs was indicative of his refusal to comply with Air Force standards concerning the use of illegal drugs. The applicant was advised of his rights in the matter. An evaluation officer reviewed the case and recommended the applicant be discharged with service characterized as general. The evaluation officer stated by the applicant’s own admission he intended to continue the use of illegal drugs. In a legal review of the case file, the assistant staff judge advocate found the case legally sufficient and recommended discharge. The discharge authority concurred with the recommendation and directed a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. The applicant was discharged on 31 July 1980. He served 1 year, 7 months, and 12 days on active duty. On 13 June 1983, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied the applicant’s request that his general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. 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. The board determined the misconduct exhibited by the applicant precluded the upgrading of his discharge (Exhibit B). On 23 December 2013, 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 warranting the applicant’s character of service and narrative reason for separation changed. 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. 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 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-2013-01923 in Executive Session on 28 January 2014, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 April 2013, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 23 December 2013. 1 2