RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 
 
 
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2010-00497 
  INDEX CODE:  110.00 
  COUNSEL:  NONE 
  HEARING DESIRED:  YES 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded
 to a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
He was arrested for possessing a small amount of marijuana.  He entered 
a plea and was released to military custody and discharged.  Everyone is
 not suited for military life - because he could not adapt, he was punished. 
 
In support of his request, the applicant provides a personal statement,
 DD Form 293, Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from 
the Armed Forces of the United States, and documents extracted from his 
military personnel records. 
 
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 27 March 1969. 
 
The applicant’s commander recommended that he be discharged from the Air Force
 under the provisions of AFM 39-12, section F.  The specific reasons are as follows: 
 
   a.  The applicant did on or about 1 December 1970 through 7 January 1971,
 without authority absent himself from his organization.  He was apprehended 
by civilian authorities in El Paso, Texas, on 18 December 1970 for the possession
 of a dangerous drug (Amphetamines).  He was found guilty and placed on probation 
for one year and fined $37.00 court costs. 
 
   b.  The applicant’s attitude, military bearing and behavior had not conformed 
to Air Force standards and frequent counseling had produced no favorable effect 
on his performance or conduct. 
 
   c.  The applicant was given a psychiatric evaluation on 13 October 1970.  The 
report indicated the applicant had an immature personality and situational 
maladjustment to service life. 
 
On 22 January 1971, the applicant requested discharge under AFM 39-12, paragraph
 2-78 for the good of the service. 
 
In a legal review of the case file, the staff judge advocate found the case legally
 sufficient and recommended discharge.   
 
On 10 February 1971, the discharge authority concurred with the recommendations and 
directed discharge.  The applicant was discharged on 18 February 1971.  He served 
1 year, 10 months and 22 days on active duty. 
 
On 8 April 2010, the Board staff requested the applicant provide documentation 
pertaining to his post-service activities, within 30 days (Exhibit C).  The applicant
 provided a response which 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 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. 
 
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-2010-00497
 in Executive Session on 21 September 2010, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 
 
 
 
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-00497 was considered: 
 
  Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 February 2010, w/atchs. 
  Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. 
  Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 8 April 2010. 
  Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, dated 7 May 2010.