RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02407 COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to “honorable.” ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His discharge for possession of drugs was unjust. He was not present when his roommate and his roommate’s girlfriend were arrested by the police in his room. He did not know that he was in any trouble until he was denied a transfer. He was wrongfully discharged and does not know why he was used as a scapegoat – his roommate was discharged honorably. In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his DD Form 214, Report of Separation from Active Duty; DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the United States and a personal statement dated 10 Mar 1975. His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 27 Aug 1973, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force. On 7 Mar 1975, his commander notified him that he was recommending he be discharged under the provisions of AFM 39-12, Separation for Unsuitability, Unfitness, Misconduct, Resignation, or Request for Discharge for the Good of the Service and Procedures for the Rehabilitation Program. The specific reasons for his action are reflected in the Notification Memorandum at Exhibit B. On 7 Mar 1975, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification. On 24 Mar 1975, the Acting Staff Judge Advocate found the discharge legally sufficient. On 18 Apr 1975, the applicant was discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) discharge after serving 1 year, 7 months and 17 days of active duty. On 6 Jan 2014, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. (Exhibit C) In an electronic communiqué, the applicant provided previously submitted documentation in the form of a personal statement from 1975. He also provided a United States Postal Service Notification of Personnel Action form. His complete submission, with attachments, 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; however, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to compel us to recommend granting the relief sought on that basis. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. ________________________________________________________________ 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 in Executive Session on 20 Feb 2014, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC- 2013-02407: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 13 May 2013, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, undated, w/atch. Exhibit D. E-mail, Applicant, 7 Jan 2014, w/atchs. Panel Chair 1